Back
2021 Supreme(Online)(Guj) 7753
HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT
SAMIR J. DAVE, J
STATE OF GUJARAT – Appellant
Versus
MUSTAK GULAM UMARJI LALLU VO. PATEL – Respondent
CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 731 of 2008
For the Appellants/Petitioners: MR DHARMESH DEVNANI
For the Respondents: MR AV PRAJAPATI(672)
An acquittal judgment should not be disturbed unless there's a manifest error of law or the evidence is so overwhelming that no reasonable person would reach the same conclusion.
Headnote:(A) Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - Section 378(1)(3) - Appeal against acquittal - The trial court acquitted the accused due to lack of evidence and contradictions in witness statements, thereby establishing the prosecution's failure to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. (Paras 12-14)
(B) Powers of Appellate Court - The appellate court should not interfere with lower court's finding of acquittal unless the decision is perverse or manifests illegality, with the presumption of innocence reinforced by the acquittal. (Paras 5-6)
Facts of the case:
The accused was acquitted of charges under Indian Penal Code and the Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, with evidence failing to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Findings of Court:
The trial court justified its acquittal based on contradictions and lack of corroborative evidence from independent witnesses.
Issues: The main question was the credibility of witness statements and whether the prosecution established its case.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that two reasonable conclusions from evidence do not warrant appellate interference unless the trial court's conclusion is manifestly erroneous.
Result: Appeal dismissed.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. acquittal based on lack of evidence. (Para 1 , 2 , 4) |
| 2. prosecution's evidence criticized. (Para 5 , 11) |
| 3. principles governing appellate powers. (Para 6 , 7) |
| 4. court's role in reviewing acquittal. (Para 8 , 9) |
| 5. final judgment confirmed as proper. (Para 12) |
JUDGEMENT
The present appeal, under Section 378 (1) (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 , is directed against the judgement and order of acquittal dated 14.08.2007 passed by the learned Additonal Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.3, Bharuch, in Atrocity Case No. 23 of 2007 whereby the accused was acquitted of the charges leveled against him.
The facts of the prosecution case in brief are as under:
2.1 On 26.06.2006 at about 14:15 hours the present respondent-accused came to the shop of Siraj Ahmeda Gaji where the complainant- Umedbhai Ambubhai Vasava and witness- Shantibhai Shankerbhai Vasava were working at that time the accused- Akib Mustab Lallu Vo. Patel, who was minor and case against him was registered before the Juvenile Court also came and made some conversation with Shantilal and thereafter Akib started to give foul abuses to Shantilal and in the meantime accused Mustak had also come and both accused gave kick and fist blows to Shantilal and on intervention made by the complainant with a view to separate them, accused- respondent- Akib gave stick blow on the head of the complainant and thereby injured him, so also, abused him in public place. It is alleged that during the said incident, witness- Zaverbhai Jesangbhai came and asked as to why they were beating his son. The accused persons told that “sala Naida, Bhildao, bahu mota sheth thai gaya choo”. As the witness Zaverbhai asked not to give abuses, the accused respondent- Akib also gave stick blow in his head and thereby injured him. The complainant was lodged, investigation was conducted, Panchnama was drawn, statements of the witnesses were recorded and upon completion of the investigation as sufficient evidence to link the accused with crime was revealed, the accused person was charged-sheeted for the aforesaid offence. Therefore, a complaint was lodged against the accused before Bharuch Rural, Police Station for the offence punishable under Sections 323, 324 and 504 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 3(1)(10) of Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The complaint was registered as C.R. No. I-70 of 2006.
2.2 Necessary investigation was carried out and statements of witnesses were recorded. Ultimately, charge-sheet was filed before the Court of learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharuch.
2.3 Thereafter, as the case was exclusively triable by the Sessions Court the same was committed to the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Fast Track Court No.3, Bharuch under Section 209 of Cr.P.C . The case was numbered as Atrocity Case No.23 of 2007. The trial was initiated against the respondents-accused.
2.4 To prove the guilt against the accused the prosecution has examined the following witnesses:
- P.W.1 Umedbhai Ambubhai Vasava-Exh. 08 P.W.2 Tulsibhai Gordhanbhai Vasava-Exh. 11 P.W.3 Dr. Vijay Motiram Baviskar-Exh. 13 P.W.4 Gulabbhai Becharbhai Dodiya -Exh. 16 P.W.5 Shantilal Shankarbhai Vasava-Exh. 20 P.W.6 Zaverbhai Jesangbhai Vasava -Exh. 21 P.W.7 Jashubhai Khodabhai Vasava-Exh. 22 P.W.8 Ashokbhai Bhavabhai Vasava-Exh. 23 P.W.9 Siraj Ahmad Ismail Gaji -Exh. 24 P.W.10 Bhagvanbhai Govindbhai Chauhan -Exh.25 P.W.11 Kiritbhai Gamabhai Parmar -Exh. 28
2.5 In order to support the case the prosecution has produced the following documents:
1) Complaint at Exh. 9
2) Caste Certificate of the complainant at Exh. 10
3) Panchnama of scene of offence-Exh.12
4) Medical certificate issued by the Medical Officer to complainant at Exh.14
5) Medical certificate issued by the Medical Officer to witnees- Zaverbhai Jesangbhai at Exh.15
6) Copy of page no.335 of the Register regarding certificate of Scheduled Caste
