SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2025 Supreme(Guj) 1928

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V. PINTO
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Salim Mamad Khureshi – Respondent


Advocates Appeared:
For the Appellant : C.M. Shah
For the Respondent: M.S. Padaliya

Table of Content
1. appeal filed against acquittal by state. (Para 1 , 2)
2. arguments presented regarding trial court's judgment. (Para 3 , 4 , 5)
3. legal principles governing appeals against acquittal discussed. (Para 6 , 7 , 9)
4. trial court’s judgment upheld due to insufficient evidence on prosecution. (Para 10)
5. final confirmation of trial court’s acquittal ruling. (Para 11)

JUDGMENT :

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant-State under Section 378 (1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) against the impugned judgment and the order passed by the learned Special Judge and 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Trial Court’) in Special (G.E.B.) Case No. 364 of 2014 dated 30.09.2015, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent from the offence punishable under Sections 135 of the Electricity Act, 2003 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’).

2. The relevant facts leading to filing of the present appeal are as under:

2.1. The accused was in possession of Imran Pan Centre situated on Val Sura road in Jamnagar and the accused was not a consumer of electricity. On 08.05.2010, Deputy Eng

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top