Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V.PINTO
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Chunilal Dhirubhai Paghdar - M/s. Divyesh Industries – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
S.V. PINTO, J.
1. The appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Junagadh (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Criminal Case No. 4453/1993 on 03.01.2011, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 7 (1) and Section 16 (1)(A) (E) of The Prevention Of Food Adulteration Act, 1954 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act” for short).
1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as “the accused” as they stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of the case are as under:
2.1 The accused no. 3 – M/s. Divyesh Industries is the manufacturing firm and the accused no. 2 is the nominee of M/s. Divyesh Industries, Junagadh. The accused no. 1 is the partner who has given the sample and as per the case of the prosecution, on 02.12.1991 at around 17.00 hours, the complainant - Food Inspector – S.S. Patel went to the firm and took sample of Eagle Brand Double Filtered P
Appellate courts hold full power to review acquittal evidence; however, they must respect trial court findings that are reasonable, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing that an acquittal should not be overturned unless there is evident illegality or insufficient evidence contrary to natural justice ....
In acquittal appeals, a Court cannot disturb findings if multiple reasonable conclusions arise, reinforcing the presumption of innocence for the accused.
An acquittal will not be disturbed unless compelling errors are evident; the presumption of innocence heavily favors the accused in such cases.
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence remains until proven otherwise, and intervention is only warranted when the lower court's decision is perverse or illegal.
The central legal point established in the judgment is the requirement for scrupulous compliance with the provisions of the Prevention of Food Adulteration Act, 1954, in sample collection and testing....
In criminal appeals, acquittals should not be overturned unless substantial evidence indicates manifest error, upholding the presumption of innocence.
The prosecution must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused's product was intended for human consumption, and failure to comply with mandatory procedural rules can lead to acquittal.
Acquittals in criminal cases can only be overturned if the trial court's decision is manifestly erroneous or lacks legal justification; the prosecution must prove compliance with statutory requiremen....
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
