Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
J.C.Doshi
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Bhamvarsinh Vajesinh Purohit – Respondent
ORDER :
J. C. Doshi, J.
1. The State has preferred this appeal under Section 378 (1) (3) of the CRIMINAL PROCEDURE CODE , 1973 (for short “Cr.P.C.), challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 06.04.2010 passed by the learned 3rd Addl. District and Sessions Judge, Surat, in Special Atrocity Case No.29 of 2008, acquitting the accused Bhamvarsinh Vajesinh Rajput in the offence under Sections 323 , 504, 506(2) of the INDIAN PENAL CODE (for short “IPC”) along with Section 3(i)(x) of the Schedule Casts and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (for short “Atrocity Act”).
2. For convenience, the parties herein are referred to as per their original status as complainant and accused.
3. By order dated 20.11.2024, this court has joined the original complainant Thakorbhai Vanjibhai Chaudhari as party respondent to the present appeal. Mr. Aditya Choksi, learned advocate, pursuant to service of process to original complainant, remain to represent him.
4. Brief facts for preferring the present appeal are as under:
4.1. FIR bearing CR. No.II-50/2008 filed by the complainant Thakorbhai Vanjibhai Chaudhari with Mangrol Police Station, District-Surat on 29.09.2008 with the allega
In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court must respect the trial court's findings unless they are found to be perverse, as presumption of innocence is reinforced by an acquittal.
An acquittal by a trial court should not be overturned unless the findings are perverse, and the burden of proof lies on the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
The appellate court must uphold acquittals unless the prosecution's evidence conclusively proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt, affirming the presumption of innocence.
An appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and can only overturn an acquittal if the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable or perverse.
In acquittal appeals, courts maintain a presumption of innocence, only reversing if the trial court's conclusions are unjustifiable based on the evidence presented.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the necessity of substantial evidence for conviction and the presumption of innocence for the accused.
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence is paramount; the appellate court must confirm that the trial court's decision was based on reasonable evidence before interfering.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence and contradictions in witness testimonies, confirming that the incident did not constitute an offence under the Atr....
In acquittal appeals, evidence must prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt; presumption of innocence remains unless proven otherwise.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
