An appellate court can only overturn an acquittal if it finds that the prosecution's evidence was conclusive in establishing the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt.

JUDGMENT :

R. T. VACHHANI, J.

1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dated 23.03.2004 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad (City) in Sessions Case No. 263 of 2003, whereby the respondent–accused came to be acquitted of the offences punishable under Sections 302 and 114 of the INDIAN PENAL CODE , 1860 (“IPC” for short) and Section 135 of the BOMBAY POLICE ACT , 1951, the appellant – State has preferred the present appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“the Code” for short).

2. The brief facts of the case are as under:

2.1 The complainant lodged a complaint on 14.04.2003 before Bapunagar Police Station alleging that on 13.04.2003 at about 23:30 hours, he along with certain witnesses was proceeding towards a pan cabin when the respondent–accused intercepted them, abused one of the companions, followed them to a nearby tea stall, and suddenly inflicted knife blows on the chest of the deceased Hitesh Swamsingh Rathod. Another accused caught hold of the deceased, after which all the accused fled from the scene. The complainant and others rushed the injured to Shardaben Hospital, where he was declared dead on arrival. The complaint was accordingly registered and investigation ensued.

2.2 The FIR was registered at Bapunagar Police Station under Sections 302 and 114 IPC and Section 135 of the BOMBAY POLICE ACT , bearing CR No. I–464/2003. The accused were arrested on 14.04.2003 and remanded to police as well as judicial custody. Upon completion of investigation, a charge–sheet was filed on 23.06.2003 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (City), registered as Criminal Case No. 137/2003.

2.3 Since the Judicial Magistrate First Class lacked jurisdiction to try the offence under Section 302 IPC, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Ahmedabad (City) vide order dated 15.07.2003 and registered as Sessions Case No. 263 of 2003. Charges were framed under Sections 302 and 114 IPC read with Section 135 of the BOMBAY POLICE ACT against the respondent–accused, to which they pleaded not guilty and claimed to be tried. Upon conclusion of the prosecution evidence, various incriminating circumstances appearing in the evidence were put to the accused under Section 313 of the Code. The accused denied all the allegations, asserted innocence, and claimed false implication. After examining the entire oral and documentary evidence and considering submissions from both sides, the learned trial Court recorded findings in favour of the accused and acquitted them of all the charges.

3. We have heard the learned advocates for the respective parties and carefully examined the oral and documentary evidence adduced before the learned Sessions Court. The prosecution examined a total of sixteen witnesses. The details of the oral and documentary evidence are as under:

~:: Oral Evidence ::~

~:: Documentary Evidence ::~