Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
L. S. PIRZADA
Mohammed Tahir Abdul Hamid Ansari – Appellant
Versus
State Of Gujarat – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
L. S. Pirzada, J.
1. Rule. Learned APP waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent – State.
2. The present revision application has been preferred by the petitioner, who is the injured person, under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, against the judgment of acquittal passed by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6, City Civil and Sessions Court, Ahmedabad, in Sessions Case No. 86 of 2003. By the said judgment dated 15.07.2004, all the accused persons were acquitted for the offences punishable under Sections 302, 307, and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, as well as Section 135(1) of the Bombay Police Act. Respondent No. 1 – State has been represented by the Learned APP Mr. H. K. Patel. Respondent Nos. 2, 4, 5, and 6 are the original accused persons. During the pendency of this revision application, Respondent No. 3, who was also one of the original accused, has expired. Accordingly, the revision application stands abated insofar as Respondent No. 3 is concerned.
3. Heard the Learned Advocate for the Petitioner – Injured and it is submitted by him that the present petitioner is injured in the incident. Further, it is submitted
An appellate court may not disturb a trial court's acquittal unless the latter's judgment is unreasonable or perverse, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
In criminal revision against acquittal, courts must show clear evidence of error or injustice for appeal. Acquittals are upheld unless substantial proof against accused emerges.
The trial court's acquittal based on technicalities disregarded substantial eyewitness and medical evidence, necessitating a retrial.
An accused cannot be convicted solely based on identification without clear evidence, especially when all co-accused are acquitted, leading to a benefit of doubt.
The appellate court must uphold acquittals unless the prosecution's evidence conclusively proves guilt beyond reasonable doubt, affirming the presumption of innocence.
In appeals against acquittal, courts must uphold the presumption of innocence and require a high burden of proof on the prosecution to demonstrate perverse findings to overturn an acquittal.
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
