In appeals against acquittals, the appellate court must ensure substantial and compelling reasons exist to overturn the lower court's judgment, emphasizing the importance of evidential integrity and procedural compliance.

JUDGEMENT

IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD CRIMINAL APPEAL No. 926 of 1990 For Approval and Signature: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH ========================================================= 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ========================================================= STATE OF GUJARAT - Appellant(s) Versus SHIVNARESH PRUTHVINATH TRIVEDI & 1 - Opponent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MR LR PUJARI, ADDITIONAL PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for Appellant(s) : 1, RULE SERVED BY DS for Opponent(s) : 1, MR BP DALAL for Opponent(s) : 1, MR AM PAREKH for Opponent(s) : 2, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE G.B.SHAH Date : 15/02/2012 ORAL JUDGMENT 2/75 JUDGMENT (Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE RAVI R.TRIPATHI)

1. The present appeal is filed by the State of Gujarat under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code against judgment and order of acquittal dated 12.07.1990 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Jamnagar in Special Criminal Case No.1 of 1989, whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge was pleased to record acquittal of the accused for an offence under Sections 20 and 29 of the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (hereinafter referred to as, “the NDPS Act”).

The accused, two in number, were charged for an offence under Clause-(ii)of sub-section (b) of Section 20 read with Section 29 of the NDPS Act.

2. This Court is conscious that this is an appeal against an order of acquittal and the Hon'ble the Apex Court has reiterated scope and ambit of appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Hon'ble the Apex Court in the case of Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade & Anr. Vs. State of Maharashtra, reported in (1973) 2 SCC 793 = AIR 1973 SC 2622 had an occasion to observe as under:-

“5.

Before dealing with the merits of the contentions, we may perhaps make a few preliminary remarks provoked by the situation presented by this case. An appellant aggrieved by the overturning of his acquittal deserves the 3/75 JUDGMENT final court's deeper concern on fundamental principles of criminal justice. The present accused, who have suffered such a fate, have hopefully appealed to us for a loaded approach against guilt in consonance with the initial innocence presumed in their favour fortified by the acquittal that followed. We are clearly in agreement with this noble proposition, stated in American Jurisprudence at one time (not now, though) as implied in the rule against double jeopardy, in the British system as a branch of the benefit of reasonable doubt doctrine and in our own on the more logical, socially relevant and modern basis, that an acquitted accused should not be put in peril of conviction on appeal save where substantial and compelling grounds exist for such a course. In India it is not a jurisdictional limitation on the appellate court but a judge-made guideline of circumspection. But we hasten to add even here that, although the learned judges of the High Court have not expressly stated