In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court should not interfere if the trial court's judgment is based on a reasonable and plausible view of the evidence, as the order of acquittal reinforces the double presumption of innocence in favour of the accused.

ORAL JUDGMENT

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 Special Judge, Bharuch (hereinafter referred to as “the learned Trial Court”) in Special Atrocity Case No. 37/2006 on 25.09.2007 whereby, the learned Trial Court has acquitted the respondent nos. 2 and 3 for the offence punishable under Sections 323 read with Section 114 and Section 504 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(10) of Schedule Caste and Schedule Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (hereinafter referred to as “the Atrocity Act” for short). The learned Trial Court was pleased to convict the respondent no. 1 for the offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and release him on probation for good conduct under the Probation of Offenders Act for a period of two years and acquit the respondent no. 1 for the offence under Section 504 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act.

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 accused had a wooden cabin opposite the house of the complainant - Preetiben Lakshmanbhai Solanki and someone had removed the wooden supports of the cabin of the accused. The accused had a doubt that the complainant and her brother - Indravadan had removed the wooden supports and hence on 04.09.2004 at around 03.30 pm, the accused came to the raised portion in front of the house of Lakshmanbhai Kalyanbhai Solanki situated in Maktampur, Saiyedwada near Chiman Ni Tekri and started abusing the complainant. The accused no. 1 had an iron rod and assaulted the complainant with the iron rod on the left side of her head and caused her injuries and the accused nos. 2 and 3 assaulted Indravadan - the elder brother of the complainant with fists. The accused also hurled derogatary caste slurs against the complainant and the complainant filed a complaint at the Bharuch City A Division Police Station under Sections 323, 504 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 3(1)(10) of the Atrocity Act which came to be registered at Bharuch City A Division Police Station II – C.R. No. 172 of 2007.

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 the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bharuch and as the said offences against the accused were exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the case was committed to the Sessions Court, Banaskantha at Palanpur as per the provisions of Section 209 of Code of Criminal Procedure and the case was registered as Special Atrocity Case No. 37/2006.

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. 7 was framed against the accused and the statements of the accused was recorded at Exhs. 8, 9 and 10 respectively, wherein, the accused denied the contents of the charge and the entire evidence of the prosecution was taken on record.

2.4 The prosecution examined 12 witnesses and produced 6 documentary evidences on re