IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
GITA GOPI, HEMANT M.PRACHCHHAK
State Of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Balram Narendrapal – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK, J.
1. The appellant - State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal under Section 378 (1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order dated 10.12.1997 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot (hereinafter be referred to as “the trial Court”) in Sessions Case No. 8 of 1996, whereby, the trial Court has acquitted the original accused (respondent herein) for the offences punishable under Sections 302 , 449, 342 etc of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter be referred to as “the IPC ).
2. Brief facts of the present case, in nutshell, are that
2.1 That on 15.09.1995, deceased Mahammad Khujus Mahammad Ainun (complainant) was residing at Bhavnagar Road, Near Bharat Petrol Pump, Rajkot in the house of one Noor Mahammad Jivabhai has lodged the First Information Report to the effect that when he was at his home at about 2.30 pm and taking a nap, at that time, accused entered his house with a knife in his hand and assaulted him by giving a blow on stomach. After assaulting him, the accused ran away from the place and, therefore, he (injured) started shouting for help. It is alleged that after hearing the shout, said Noor Mah
Chandrappa and others Vs. State of Karnataka
An appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence after an acquittal and may only intervene if the trial court's decision is perverse or unsupported by credible evidence, emphasizing the h....
The appellate court upheld the trial Court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for credible evidence, particularly regarding dying declarations.
An appellate court must respect acquittals and only intervene if the trial court's judgment is legally erroneous or misinterprets evidence, maintaining the presumption of innocence.
The appellate court upheld the presumption of innocence and confirmed the acquittal, stating the prosecution failed to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity of compelling evidence to overturn such judgments.
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; acquittal is upheld when evidence does not convincingly establish guilt.
The appellate court must uphold acquittals unless there is clear error in the trial court's evaluation of evidence, respecting the presumption of innocence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.