Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V. PINTO
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Ilaben, D/o. Kantibhai Motibhai Rathod – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. appellant's dissatisfaction with acquittal (Para 3) |
| 3. hearing and evaluation of evidence (Para 4 , 5) |
| 4. principles of acquittal and evidence appreciation (Para 6 , 8) |
| 5. witness examination and credibility issues (Para 7) |
| 6. confirmation of acquittal by appellate court (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
JUDGMENT :
S.V. PINTO, J.
1. The appeal is filed by the appellant State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgement and order of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special (Atrocity) Case No. 71 of 2010 on 08.11.2012, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent for the offence punishable under Sections 506(2) and 294B of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Sections 3(1)(10) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Atrocity Act” for short).
1.1 The respondent is hereinafter referred to as “the accused” as he stood in the original case for the sake of convenience, clarity and brevity.
2. The brief facts that emerge from the record of th
In criminal appeals, the presumption of innocence is upheld unless proven otherwise, and the appellate court must respect the trial court's findings if a reasonable view supports its decision.
The presumption of innocence remains with the accused in acquittal appeals; reversal necessitates clear evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt, which was lacking in this case.
In acquittal appeals, presumption of innocence is reinforced, and the appellate court should only interfere with the acquittal if the trial court's ruling is perverse or unreasonable based on the pre....
The appellate court should respect the presumption of innocence in acquittals and only interfere if the trial court's verdict lacks reasonable foundation.
The appellate court may review evidence in acquittal appeals but should not reverse a trial court's acquittal unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or perverse.
An appellate court may review evidence in acquittal cases but should not interfere unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or perverse, maintaining the presumption of innocence.
The appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal unless the trial court's decision is found to be unreasonable or lacks a proper evidentiary basis.
The appellate court upheld the presumption of innocence and affirmed the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence against the accused.
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence favors the accused, limiting the appellate court's interference unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or lacks proper evidence.
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence prevails, and the appellate court must respect the Trial Court's findings if a plausible view is supported by evidence.
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
