In acquittal appeals, the appellate court respects the trial court's findings unless compelling evidence shows the decision was unreasonable.

JUDGMENT :

S.V. PINTO, J.

1. This appeal has been filed by the appellant State under Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal passed by learned Sessions Judge, Kheda at Nadiad (hereinafter referred to as "the learned Trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 129 of 2010 on 14-03-2011, whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 333, 504 and 114 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereafter referred to as "IPC" for short).

1.1 The respondents are hereinafter referred to as the accused in the rank and file 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 complainant Subhashbhai Kadvabhai Kadole was working in the State Reserve Police (SRP) and was posted with the SRP, Group - 15, Mehsana. On 10-12-2009, the complainant – Subhashbhai Kadvabhai Kadole along with Jogendrabhai Samantsinh Vaghela and Ajitbhai Dodiya had gone to give the tiffin to Police Constable - Rajendrabhai Rana, who had his duty at the well near GGS-1, Navagam and after giving him the tiffin, while they were returning to their place of work, the accused, who were going on two motorcycles, had a verbal altercation with them and pushed the complainant and caused a fracture on the finger of the left hand of the complainant. The complainant filed the complaint under Section 333, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 IPC at the Kheda Town Police Station, which came to be registered at Kheda Town Police Station I-.C.RNo.148 of 2009.

2.2 The Investigating Officer recorded the statements of the connected witnesses and seized the necessary documents and after completion of investigation, a charge-sheet came to be filed before the Court of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Kheda and as the said offences against the accused was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Kheda at Nadiad as per the provisions of Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and case was registered Sessions Case No. 129 of 2010.

2.3 The accused were duly served with the summons and the accused appeared before the learned Trial Court, and it was verified whether the copies of all the police papers were provided to the accused as per the provisions of Section 207 of the Code. A charge at Exh. 3 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused were recorded at Exhs. 4 to 7, wherein, the accused denied all the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record. 2.4 The prosecution produced fourteen oral and ten documentary evidences to bring home charge against the accused and after the learned Additional Public Prosecutor filed the closing pursis at Exh. 35, the further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 were recorded, wherein, the accused denied all the evidence of the prosecution on record. The accused refused to step into the witness box or examine witnesses on their behalf and stated that a false case has been filed against them. After the arguments of the learned Additional Public Prosecutor and the learned advocate for the accused were heard, the learned trial Court by the impugned judgment and order was pleased to acquit all the accused from all the charges leveled against them.

3. Being aggrieved and dissatisfied with the said judgment and order of acquittal, the appellant - State has filed the present appeal m