Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
S.V. PINTO
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Hardevsinh @ Dev Mahavirsinh Zala – Respondent
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 2nd Additional Sessions Judge and Special Judge, Dhrangadhra (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special Case No. 9/2006 on 12.01.2012 whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondents for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324, 504, 506(2), 147, 148 and 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 135 of the B.P. Act 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 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 On 13.10.2005, at around 01.00 am, the accused formed an unlawful assembly and armed themselves with swords and assaulted the complainant, abused him and threatened to kill him. The accused also hurled derogating caste slurs against him and the c
In acquittal appeals, the presumption of innocence prevails, and the appellate court should only interfere if the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable or perverse.
An appellate court has broad powers to review evidence in acquittal appeals but should exercise caution, respecting the presumption of innocence unless the trial court's conclusions are unreasonable.
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....
In appeals against acquittal, the appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and only intervene if the trial court's decision is perverse or unsupported by evidence.
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.
An appeal against acquittal should respect the presumption of innocence and not interfere if the acquittal is based on reasonable conclusions drawn from evidence.
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.
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.
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and not interfere with an acquittal unless the trial court's decision is unreasonable or perverse.
The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for the prosecution to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
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
