Appellate courts shall not disturb a trial court’s acquittal unless the decision is perverse or contrary to law. Where eyewitness testimony suffers from unexplained delay, lacks independent corroboration, and is provided by chance witnesses, the double presumption of innocence in favor of the accused remains, precluding a conviction.

ORAL JUDGMENT

(PER : HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HASMUKH D. SUTHAR)

1. Present appeal is directed by the appellant–State, challenging the judgment and order of acquittal dated 12.10.1999 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmedabad Rural, in Sessions Case No.221 of 1995, whereby the learned Sessions Judge acquitted the accused persons – the opponents herein, for the offenceS punishable under Sections-147, 148, 149 and 302 of the IPC (Indian Penal Code, 1860).

2. It is pertinent to note that during the pendency of the present appeal, the respondent Nos. 1, 2 and 3, who are original accused Nos. 1 to 3 died and therefore, the appeal stands abated qua accused Nos. 1, 2 and 3 namely, accused No.1 - Bhikhabhai Velabhai Bharwad; accused No. 2 Bhavanbhai Kanabhai Bharwad and accused No.3 – Valjibhai Nathabhai Bharwad.

3. The brief facts of the prosecution case are that on 16.10.1999, after having dinner at night, the complainant and Sangram, the elder son of his grandfather, aged about 55 years, went out into the field to keep watch so that no person could make the cattle enter the paddy crop. The accused persons arrived at their 31-vigha field, known as the 'Shiruna Pak', at about half past one o’clock. While patrolling, they reached the boundary of the field; at that time, Sangram was walking ahead of the complainant. At that moment, Bharwad Bhikha Ghela, Bhavan Kamna, Valji Natha, Lavji, Hira Gaga, Bhopa Bhoja, and Shana Popat, of the same village, were grazing their cattle in the wasteland near the paddy field of the complainant. When Sangram shouted at them, accused Bhikha Ghela, Bhavan Kana, Valji Natha, and Lalji approached Sangram and suddenly grabbed him. Therefore, the complainant did not go near them. Sangram shouted repeatedly, but the complainant was frightened. The accused Hira Gaga, Bhopa Bhoja, and Shana Popat ran after the complainant to catch him, saying that Sangram had fallen into their hands and had to be killed, and that they should not let this Kanu escape alive. Saying so, they chased him. However, the complainant ran away to a distance and, circling the fields, reached his house. Upon reaching home, he woke up Sangram's brother Jesingbhai and others and narrated the aforesaid facts. Thereafter, at about 4:00 o’ clock, the complainant remained at his house, and thereafter, at about 5:00 o’ clock, the complainant, Jesing Jiva, Vaghji, Manjibhai, and Dharamshibhai set out to search for Sangram in the fields. While searching, at about 11:00 o’clock, they found Sangram lying dead in the field of Harijan Shankar Trikambhai, of Rethal, near the ring dam on the outskirts of Daduka. Blood was oozing from his mouth, and the dhoti he was wearing was also stained with blood. Thereafter, the complainant lodged a complaint at Sanand Police Station. After the complainant filed the complaint, the Investigating Officer visited the place of incident and drew the Inquest Panchnama and the Panchnama of the place of incident. Statements of the concerned witnesses were recorded, and at the end of the investigation, as there was sufficient evidence against the accused, a charge-sheet was filed in the Court of the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sanand. As the Sessions Court alone has jurisdiction to conduct the trial for the offence under Section 302 of the IPC, the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Sanand, committed the ca