Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Ashwinkumar Takhatsinh Parmar on 3 April, 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025
undefined
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 947 of 2008
FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK Sd/-
================================================================
Approved for Reporting Yes No
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
ASHWINKUMAR TAKHATSINH PARMAR & ORS.
================================================================
Appearance:
MR UTKARSH SHARMA ADDL. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR for the Appellant(s)
No. 1
ABATED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1
MR NIRAD D BUCH(4000) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 2,3
================================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
Date : 03/04/2025
ORAL JUDGMENT
1. Present appeal is filed by the appellant - State of Gujarat under Section 378(1)(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 against the impugned judgment and order dated 29.11.2007 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, Fast Track Court No.7, Vadaodara (hereinafter be referred to as "the trial Court") in Sessions Case No. 145 of 2006 below Exh. 74 whereby the trial Court has acquitted the accused persons for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 306 etc. of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter Page 1 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined referred to as the "IPC") read with the provision under Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2. Brief facts of the present case, in nutshell, are as under:-
2.1 The daughter of the complainant namely Shakuntlaben @ Nishaben married with accused No.1 in 2003 and after her marriage Shakuntlaben (hereinafter referred to as "deceased") was residing in her matrimonial home. During the said wedlock, she delivered a male child namely Dhruv. After her marriage, she frequently visited her parental home and intimated about ill-treatment / harassment caused by the accused persons to her on account of the dowry and other household work.
2.2 It is specific case of the prosecution that the accused persons were demanded Onida TV and also Rs.40,000/- since, accused No.1 wanted to go abroad for earning livelihood for his family. On account of that, the accused persons were giving mental and physical torture Page 2 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined to the deceased. On 19.11.2005, the deceased had written a letter to the complainant and informed about the ill-treatment meted out to the deceased and on 20.11.2005, she left her matrimonial house and came to the parental home. After persuasion of the family members and the elders, she returned to her matrimonial home.
2.3 Thereafter, on 27.03.2006, the complainant had received a phone call from accused No.1 that the deceased had fallen down in the water tank situated outside the home and because of that the deceased sustained some injuries and they had taken the deceased to the near by hospital.
2.4 On receipt of the said information, the complainant along with his wife and other relatives reached to Sangam Hospital at Vadodara and thereafter, considering the serious condition of the deceased, she was shifted to one Premdas Jalaram Hospital on 01.04.2006 where, during the course of treatment, after Page 3 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined about five days the deceased succumbed to her injuries. 2.5 Therefore, on 5.4.2006 at about 6.00 o'clock in evening, the complainant had lodged FIR before the concerned police station. The same is being registered as I C.R. No.79 of 2006 at City Police Station Vadodara for the offence punishable under Sections 306, 498(A), 201 and 114 of IPC, read with the provision of Sections 3 and 7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act.
2.6 After recording the FIR, the concerned Investigating Officer of the City Police Station had recorded the statement of the concerned witnesses, collected the relevant material, drawn the panchnama of the place of incident, collected the PM notes and after having found sufficient material against the accused persons, filed the charge-sheet against all the accused persons before the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class. As the offence was triable by the Court of Sessions, the concerned Court has committed the case under Section 209 of the Criminal Procedure Code to the Page 4 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined Court of Sessions, wherein it has been registered as Sessions Case No. 145 of 2006.
2.7 The charge against the accused persons came to be framed at Exh.9 by the trial Court for the aforesaid offences and explained it to them. The accused persons denied having committed any offence. The accused persons pleaded not guilty to the charge and pleaded for trial and hence, the case was tried by the trial Court. 2.8 To prove the case, the prosecution has examined nine prosecution witnesses which read as under:-
Witness Exh. Name of Witness
No.
1 20 Jashvantsinh Ganpatsinh Solanki
(complainant and father of the deceased) 2 34 Premilaben Jasvantsinh Solanki (mother of the deceased) 3 36 Arjunsinh Chandrasinh Solanki (Uncle of complainant) 4 37 Kanaksinh Himmatsinh Solanki (Uncle of complainant) 5 64 Maganbhai Kalidas Parmar (Panch witness) 6 66 Lalabhai Bajrang Kahar (Panch Witness) 7 68 Sunil Yashwantrao Sonvane (panch witness) 8 70 Digvijaysinh Mahendrasinh Vaghela Page 5 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined (Investigating officer) 9 71 Dr. Sutpa Basu (Medical Officer) 2.9 The prosecution has also produced documentary evidence which read as under:-
Exh. Details of documents
21 Letter written by the deceased
22 Complaint
23 Book containing signature of the deceased 38 Inquest panchnama 39 Panchnama regarding cloths and the blood sample of the deceased 40 Panchnama of place of offence 41 Certificate of treatment of injury 42 Death Certificate 43 Report of doctor of Premdas Jalaram Hospital 44 Report of doctor of S.S.G. Hospital 45 Certificate given by doctor of S.S.G. hospital 46 Letter written for opinion of FSL 47 Report of FSL Vadodara 48 Report of FSL Vadodara 49 Yadi written for inquest 50 Yadi written for handing over the body 51 Yadi written to put dead body in cold room 52 Yadi regarding cause of death in the p.m. note. 53 Yadi written by doctor of Sangam Hospital 54 Yadi written to Sangam Hospital with regard to consciousness of the patient 55 Yadi written to Sangam Hospital regarding regaining of consciousness of the patient 56 Yadi written by doctor of Jalaram Hospital Page 6 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined 57 Yadi written to Jalaram Hospital with regard to consciousness of the patient 58 Yadi written to Jalaram Hospital regarding regaining of consciousness of the patient 59 Yadi for providing medical treatment 60 Receipt of handing over the body 61 Yadi written for permission to arrest the accused 62 Permission regarding arrest of the accused 63 Permission for filing the chargesheet 65 Panchnama regarding the place of offence as well as seizing the clothes of the deceased 72 P.M. note.
2.10 It appears that, the trial court has framed below mentioned issues for decided the case.
1. Whether the prosecution proves that the deceased Shankutala committed suicide?
2. Whether the prosecution proves that the accused persons have given physical and mental torture on account of demand of dowry and given cruelty and harassment?
3. Whether prosecution proves that on account of the demand of dowry the deceased committed suicide?
2.11 In replied to the aforesaid issues, issue no.1 answered by the trial Court in affirmative and in the rest of the issues, trial Court answered negative. On the basis of the evidence recorded by the trial Court, the trial Court has recorded the findings and passed impugned Page 7 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined order of acquittal in favour of respondents original accused persons.
2.12 After closure of the evidence, further statement of the accused under Section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 has been recorded. After hearing both sides and considering the evidence on records, the trial Court by impugned judgment and order has acquitted the accused from all the charges levelled against them.
2.13 Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment and order of acquittal the appellant -
State of Gujarat has preferred this Appeal.
3. Heard Mr. Utkarsh Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant - State of Gujarat and Mr. Nirad Buch, learned counsel appearing for the respondents - accused at length.
4. Mr. Sharma, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the appellant - State of Gujarat, while referring to the entire oral as well as documentary evidence, has assailed Page 8 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined the impugned judgment and order and has submitted that the trial Court has not taken into consideration the evidence connecting the accused persons to the alleged offence in its true and proper perspective. 4.1 Mr. Sharma, learned APP, has submitted that the trial Court ought to have believed that the prosecution has been able to prove the charges levelled against the accused persons with regard to harassment and ill- treatment to the deceased. While referring to the evidence of the witnesses and the material collected against the accused persons, learned APP has submitted that the prosecution has established the case against the accused persons by examining the witnesses who have supported the case of the prosecution, however, the trial Court has discarded and disbelieved the evidence of the witnesses and failed to appreciate the statutory presumption.
4.2 Mr. Sharma, learned APP, has also submitted that P.W. No.1 - father of the deceased and complainant, P.W. Page 9 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined No.2-mother of the deceased and P.W. Nos.3 and 4- Uncles of the complainant have supported the case of the prosecution and from their evidence, prosecution is able to prove the charge however, the trial Court failed to appreciated the same while recording the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
4.3 Mr. Sharma, learned APP, has further submitted that the deceased died within seven years from the marriage and the trial Court failed to draw the inference under Section 313(A) of the Indian Evidence Act and therefore, the impugned judgment and award of the trial Court is illegal, unjust and bad in law. 4.4 Mr. Sharma, learned APP, has submitted that the Dr.Sutpa Basu, P.W.9- Exh.71 has supported the case of the prosecution and she has in her evidence deposed before the Court that the deceased died on account of strangulation and the injuries received on account of strangulation, however, the trial Court failed to appreciate the same while passing the impugned Page 10 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined judgment and order of acquittal.
4.5 According to the submission of Mr. Sharma learned APP, the trial Court ought to have convicted the accused persons and ought to have imposed necessary sentence. He has prayed to allow the present appeal and to quash and set aside the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
5. Mr. Nirad D. Buch, learned counsel appearing for the respondents - accused has submitted that the trial Court has rightly passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal, after appreciation of the evidence led by the prosecution and there is no any infirmity or any illegality committed by the trial Court while passing the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. 5.1 Mr. Buch, learned counsel for the respondents has submitted that the prosecution measurably failed to establish the allegations made in the FIR and in support of that the prosecution failed to establish the case against the present respondents beyond reasonable doubt. He Page 11 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined has submitted that though the witnesses have stated before the Court that there was an ill treatment meted out to the deceased but that was not established beyond reasonable doubt and thus, the trial Court rightly appreciated the evidence of cross witnesses, who have deposed in favour of the prosecution. 5.2 Mr. Buch, learned counsel has further submitted the impugned judgment and order of acquittal is in consonance with the facts of the present case and is in light of the settled legal principles enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court and therefore, this Court may not interfere in the impugned judgment and order of the trial Court.
5.3 Mr. Buch, learned counsel has also submitted that the impugned FIR was lodged almost after nine days from the date of the incident and thus, the same was recorded after consultation with other family member and after making false and fabricated story put forward by the complainant. He has further submitted that cooked up Page 12 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined story was narrated before the concerned Investigating Officer, which was not supported by the witnesses and that was found completely contrary to the evidence and thus, the trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence recorded by the trial Court and has not committed any error while passing the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
5.4 Mr. Buch, learned counsel has also submitted that P.W.9 - doctor, in her cross examination has specifically mentioned that the deceased died because of the strangulation. He has submitted that during the course of treatment the deceased survived about 8 days which shows that the accused have tried to give a proper and better treatment to the deceased for her survival and thus, the allegations made by the complainant in the impugned FIR and the deposition before the Court is completely contrary and thus, the trial Court has rightly appreciated the medical as well as the oral evidence of the witnesses and recorded the findings, which are in consonance with the facts of the present case and has Page 13 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined rightly passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
5.5 Mr. Buch, learned counsel for the respondents urges before the Court that present appeal may not be entertained and the same may be dismissed and impugned judgment and order of acquittal may be confirmed.
6. This Court has perused the judgment and order of acquittal rendered by the trial Court and carefully considered the rival contentions, evidence and material placed on record.
7. The issue involved in present appeal is that, whether the trial Court has rightly passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal in favour of the accused persons, after appreciating the evidence led by the prosecution or nor? and whether any illegality or infirmity recorded by the trial Court in the impugned judgment and order or not?
8. In view of the above referred facts and Page 14 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined contentions of the learned counsels and on perusal of the record and proceedings, it transpires that the trial Court has rightly appreciated the evidence of all the concerned witnesses including P.W. Nos. 1,2,3,4 and also P.W. Nos. 8 and 9. Further, the trial Court has rightly discussed the evidence of all the concerned, while considering issue nos. 2 and 3, more particularity from paragraph Nos. 11 onward. From the facts narrated by the trial Court, it is clear that the FIR recorded by P.W.1 is after about 8 days from the date of incident, as the incident had taken place on 27.3.2006 and the FIR was recorded on 5.4.2006 and in between the deceased was treated in two different hospitals, where during the course of the treatment, through out P.W.1 and P.W. 2 and the other relatives of the accused were remained present.
9. Even at the fist instance, the accidental entry was recorded before the concerned police station and the same was investigated by P.S.I. Hirabhai Jalambhai and P.S.I. S.R. Zala, who have preliminary investigated the said accidental entry and recorded the statement of all Page 15 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined concerned witnesses, however, reason best known to the prosecution, neither the prosecution has examined those two witnesses nor referred and relied upon their statements and it was also not made part of the chargesheet. Therefore, the trial Court has rightly discussed the said aspect in paragraph No. 18, which leads to the inference drawn against the prosecution, since the prosecution has suppressed the genesis of the case led before the trial Court. It also appears that though the witnesses have stated that on 20.11.2005, complaint was given before the Jambughoda Police Station but during the course of investigation, the I.O. - P.W.8 has specifically admitted that no such complaint was registered or given before the Jambughoda police station by the complainant or any other family members of the deceased. Meaning thereby, the prosecution failed to establish the case against the present respondents with regard to the ill-treatment or any cruelty meted out to the deceased on account of demand of dowry.
10. Even considering the evidence of P.W. Nos. 1 to 4, Page 16 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined the facts reveal that the story narrated by way of the written chit produced by the informant before the concerned I.O. at Exh.21, also creates a serious doubt and is without there being any support. Therefore, the trial Court has rightly appreciated and discussed the said chit at Exh.21 in detailed and thus, the trial Court has, after appreciating all the facts and evidence produced before it, has rightly passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. Even from the evidence of P.W.9 the fact reveals that the accused persons have tried their level best to survive the deceased and therefore, they had immediately taken the injured to the nearby hospital at Sangam and thereafter, as per the advise of doctor, they have shifted the injured at better hospital i.e. Premdas Jalaram Hospital, where she had survived for almost five days and on 5.4.2006, she succumbed to her injuries and therefore, the intention on the part of the accused persons is also required to be taken into consideration that they have tried to save the deceased and also given proper treatment to the deceased for her survival. Page 17 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined Further, the accused persons have also spent huge amount for the treatment of the deceased however, unfortunately the deceased died. The prosecution failed to produce any cogent and material evidence before the trial Court which leads to connect the present accused persons in the present offence.
11. Therefore, the story put forward by the prosecution is rightly disbelieved by the trial Court and after examining oral as well as documentary evidence and going through the evidence of the witnesses, the trial Court has rightly passed the impugned judgment and order of acquittal. Considering the overall facts and circumstances of the case and perusing the impugned judgment and order of the trial Court, it transpires that the trial Court has not committed any error of facts and law in passing the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
12. It is well settled by catena of decisions that the an Appellate Court has full power to review, re-appreciate Page 18 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. However, Appellate Court must bear in mind that in case of acquittal there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent Court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court.
13. Further, if two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the Appellate Court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court. Further, while exercising the powers in appeal against the order of acquittal, the Court of appeal would not ordinarily interfere with the order of acquittal unless the approach of the lower Court is vitiated by some manifest illegality and the conclusion arrived at would not be arrived at by any reasonable Page 19 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined person and, therefore, the decision is to be characterized as perverse. Merely because two views are possible, the Court of appeal would not take the view which would upset the judgment delivered by the Court below. However, the Appellate Court has a power to review the evidence if it is of the view that the conclusion arrived at by the Court below is perverse and the Court has committed a manifest error of law and ignored the material evidence on record. A duty is cast upon the Appellate Court, in such circumstances, to re-appreciate the evidence to arrive to a just decision on the basis of material placed on record to find out whether the accused are connected with the commission of the crime with which he is charged.
14. The scope and principles are enunciated by the Hon'ble Apex Court in case of Chandrappa and others Vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2007) 4 SCC 415, more particularly paragraph Nos. 42 and 43, which was subsequently re-affirmed by the Hon'ble Apex Court Rajesh Prasad Vs. State of Bihar and another, Page 20 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined reported in [2022] 3 SCC 471, wherein, the Hon'ble Apex Court has enunciated the general principles in case of acquittal, more particularly in paragraph No. 26 the general principles are set out by the Hon'ble Apex Court based upon various decisions of the Hon'ble Apex Court. Then in case of Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar Vs. State of Karnataka, reported in AIR 2024 SC 2252 = (2024) 8 SCC 149, the Hon'ble Apex Court has dealt with the similar issue, more particularly, in paragraph Nos. 37 to 40. Hence, I am in complete agreement with the findings recorded by the trial Court.
15. It is also worthwhile to refer to the recent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ramesh vs. State of Karnataka, reported in [2024] 9 SCC 169, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has held and observed in paras-20 and 21 as under:-
"20. At this stage, it would be relevant to refer to the general principles culled out by this Court in Chandrappa and others vs. State of Karnataka, regarding the power of the appellate Court while dealing with an appeal against a judgment of acquittal. The principles read thus: Page 21 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined "42. .... (1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
(2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law.
(3) Various expressions, such as, "substantial and compelling reasons", "good and sufficient grounds", "very strong circumstances", "distorted conclusions", "glaring mistakes", etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of "flourishes of language" to emphasize the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.
(4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.
(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court.
21. In Rajendra Prasad v. State of Bihar, a three- Judge Bench of this Court pointed out that it would Page 22 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined be essential for the High Court, in an appeal against acquittal, to clearly indicate firm and weighty grounds from the record for discarding the reasons of the Trial Court in order to be able to reach a contrary conclusion of guilt of the accused. It was further observed that, in an appeal against acquittal, it would not be legally sufficient for the High Court to take a contrary view about the credibility of witnesses and it is absolutely imperative that the High Court convincingly finds it well-nigh impossible for the Trial Court to reject their testimony. This was identified as the quintessence of the jurisprudential aspect of criminal justice. Viewed in this light, the brusque approach of the High Court in dealing with the appeal, resulting in the conviction of Appellant Nos. 1 and 2, reversing the cogent and well-considered judgment of acquittal by the Trial Court giving them the benefit of doubt, cannot be sustained."
16. Considering the entire evidence on record, it clearly appears that there is no credible evidence to connect the present accused with the alleged crime and the evidence on record is not so convincing to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the accused has committed the alleged crime. Therefore, the accused cannot be convicted on the evidence on record.
17. On perusal of the impugned judgment and order, it clearly transpires that the trial Court has not committed any error of fact and law in appreciating the Page 23 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/947/2008 JUDGMENT DATED: 03/04/2025 undefined evidence on record and in acquitting the accused from the charges levelled against them. Even on reappreciation of the evidence, it clearly transpires that the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charge levelled against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, the impugned judgment and order of the trial Court is sustainable and the present appeal is liable to be dismissed.
18. In view of the above, the present appeal is devoid of merits and it deserves to be dismissed. Resultantly, it is dismissed. The impugned judgment and order of acquittal dated 29.11.2007 passed by the trial Court in Sessions Case No. 145 of 2006 below Exh. 74 is hereby confirmed. Bail bond, if any, stands cancelled. Record and proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.
Sd/-
(HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J) SURESH SOLANKI Page 24 of 24 Uploaded by SURESH SOLANKI(HC00208) on Wed Apr 09 2025 Downloaded on : Wed Apr 09 21:28:19 IST 2025