Gujarat High Court
State Of Gujarat vs Shankarbhai Bharubhai Rathwa on 8 April, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
Reserved On : 16/03/2026
Pronounced On : 08/04/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 630 of 2010
==========================================================
STATE OF GUJARAT
Versus
SHANKARBHAI BHARUBHAI RATHWA & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR. TIRHTRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
BAILABLE WARRANT SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
MR M A CHAUHAN(11262) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
CAV JUDGMENT
1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dated 21.07.2009, passed by the learned 2 nd Additional Sessions Judge, Dahod in Sessions Case No.126 of 2007, for the offences punishable under Sections 498(A), 306, and 114 of the Indian Penal Code, the appellant - State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Code").
2. The prosecution case as unfolded during the trial before the trial Court is that the complainant's daughter was married in June 2005, and initially lived peacefully with her husband and in-laws, but after some time she was subjected to continuous mental and physical harassment by her Page 1 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined husband, mother-in-law, and other relatives, including demands and ill-treatment, due to which she frequently returned to her parental home and narrated her grievances, despite attempts at reconcilliation, the harassment persisted, and on the day of the incident in the early morning, information was received that she had fallen into a well, and upon reaching the spot, the complainant found her dead, leading him to allege that her death was not accidental but the result of sustained in-laws, which either drove her to commit suicide or resulted in her being pushed. Therefore, the complaint was filed against the respondent/s-accused.
3. After investigation, sufficient prima facie evidence was found against the accused person/s and therefore charge- sheet was filed in the competent criminal Court. Since the offence alleged against the accused person/s was exclusively triable by the Court of Sessions, the learned Magistrate committed the case to the Sessions Court where it came to be registered as Sessions Case No.126 of 2007. The charge was framed against the accused person/s. The accused pleaded not guilty and came to be tried.
4. In order to bring home the charge, the prosecution has examined 8 witnesses and also produced 5 documentary evidence before the trial Court, which are described in the Page 2 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined impugned judgment are as under;
Oral Evidences
Sr. No. Exh. No. Oral Evidence
1. 10 Dr. Manoharlal Dalchand Kuri, who conducted the
postmortem of the deceased Ramtiben.
2. 14 Panch witness, Samantsinh.
3. 21 Mr. Pratapbhai Bhalajibhai Dayra, father of the
deceased Ramtiben.
4. 25 Abheysinh Pratapsinh Dayra, elder brother of the
deceased Ramtiben.
5. 26 Subhashbhai Pratapbhai Dayra, younger brother of
the deceased Ramtiben.
6. 28 Santokben Abheysinh Dayra, sister-in-law of the
deceased Ramtiben.
7. 29 Kamlaben Pratabhai Dayra
8. 30 Rupabhai Manabhai Parmar, the Investigating
Officer.
Documentary evidences
Sr. No. Exh.No. Documentary Evidence
1. 07 Inquest Panchnama.
2. 08 Panchnama regarding the clothes on the
dead body.
Page 3 of 24
Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026
undefined
3. 11 PM Report.
4. 15 Crime Scene Report.
5. 22 Original complaint.
5. After hearing both the parties and after analysis of evidence adduced by the prosecution, the learned trial Judge acquitted the accused for the offences for which the charge was framed, by holding that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
6. Learned APP for the appellant - State has pointed out the facts of the case and having taken this Court through both, oral and documentary evidence, recorded before the learned trial Court, would submit that the learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in true sense and perspective; and that the trial Court has committed error in acquitting the accused. It is submitted that the learned trial Court ought not to have given much emphasis to the contradictions and/or omissions appearing in the evidence and ought to have given weightage to the dots that connect the accused with the offence in question. It is submitted that the learned trial Court has erroneously come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. It Page 4 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined is also submitted that the learned Judge ought to have seen that the evidence produced on record is reliable and believable and it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had committed an offence in question. It is, therefore, submitted that this Court may allow this appeal by appreciating the evidence led before the learned trial Court.
7. As against that, learned advocate for the respondent/s would support the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court and has submitted that the learned trial Court has not committed any error in acquitting the accused. The trial Court has taken possible view as the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the present appeal by confirming the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned trial Court.
8. In the aforesaid background, considering the oral as well as documentary evidence on record, independently and dispassionately and considering the impugned judgment and order of the trial Court, the following aspects weighed with the Court;
8.1 The prosecution has mainly relied on the complaint, that has been filed by the father of the deceased Page 5 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined which is produced vide Exh-22, wherein, it is the case of the prosecution that the marriage of the deceased Ramtiben with Accused No. 1 took place somewhere around June 2005, and after the marriage the deceased Ramtiben used to come often to her parental house, and even the brothers and sisters of the deceased used to come to their matrimonial home to get the deceased to her parental house during his lifetime. 8.2 In the said complaint, produced vide Exh-22, the complainant father of the deceased had also stated that, the Accused No. 1 and the deceased also used to come together to the parental house of the deceased and used to stay for a day, and thereafter, they used to go together, and in the initial 5-6 months of the marriage there were cordial relation between the deceased and the accused. It has been stated in the complaint that on one of the occasion when the deceased had come to her parental house, she had narrated the fact that the Accused No. 2 had taken the locket which was in the locker which belonged to the deceased, and thereafter, the Accused No. 2 did not permit the deceased to wear the said locket. It has also been alleged that time, and again the deceased used to come to her parental house, and used to inform that the Accused No. 2 and 3 were not talking to the deceased and were not eating the food prepared by the deceased. It has also been stated that Accused No. 2 and 3 Page 6 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined used to tell the deceased that they want Accused No. 2 to marry again, and the said complainant has alleged that the deceased was harassed. In view of the fact that accused had an affair with the daughter of Dhansukbhai Bhanubhai Vanderia, and as and when the deceased used to tell the Accused No.1 about the same, he used to threaten the deceased of her life, and it is alleged that because of the said harassment of the accused, the deceased had committed suicide.
8.3 The father of the complainant has been examined vide Exh- 21, wherein he has stated that none of the family members of the accused were talking to the deceased at her matrimonial home, on the last occasion when the deceased had come to the parental house she had come with her other daughter, Samath i.e. the sister of the deceased and her husband Jayesh. The fact remains that the prosecution has neither examined daughter Samath or the brother-in-law Jayesh, whom the complainant had met while coming from the matrimonial home.
8.4 The complainant has made allegations with respect to the fact that the Accused No.1 had an affair with daughter of Dhansukbhai Bhanubhai but neither the prosecution had been able to identify Dhansukbhai Bhanubhai nor his daughter. Moreover, in cross-examination it Page 7 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined transpires that the complainant had gone to the police station to file a complaint, even when the dead body of the deceased was found in the well, and also the fact that when the deceased had come for the last time to the parental house, the Accused No.1 had gone for the labour work. 8.5 The brother of the deceased, and the son of the complainant Abhaysinh Dayra has been examined as PW-4, vide Exh- 25, in his deposition he has stated that the relation between the accused and the deceased was cordial for the first seven months of their marriage. The said witnesses has stated that, when the deceased had come to her parental house she had informed that Accused No. 1 had gone out of town and Accused No.2 and 3 were not talking to her, and were not eating the food prepared by the deceased and also were taunting the deceased that they do not like her and wanted to get Accused No. 1 married to another lady. He has also stated that after the festival of Holi, Kanubhai, Dhansukbhai and Shankarbhai had come to parental house of the deceased to take her to the matrimonial home. The fact remains that the prosecution has not examined the said Kanubhai, Dhansukbhai and Shankarbhai to prove the said fact.
8.6 Moreover, the said witness also states that after talking to Accused No. 1, he assured that he will not repeat Page 8 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined the said mistake and it is only after the said assurance that the brother of the deceased had permitted the deceased to go to her matrimonial home. If the complaint filed by the complainant and his deposition and the evidence of the prosecution is taken into consideration, all the said deposition talks about the fact that the cousin sister of the deceased Ramilaben was the first person to find out that the deceased had jumped into the well, but the prosecution has not examined the said Ramileben as a witness to the case of the prosecution. The said witness i.e. PW-4 also admits that after the marriage more or less the deceased was staying at her parental house, and she was residing at her parental house before the date of the incident, and the deceased was happy at her house. The said witness also is not able to prove and identify the daughter of Dhansukbhai Batubhai. 8.7 The other brother of the deceased Subhash Dayra has been examined as PW-5, vide Exh-26, he has also reiterated that what has been stated by the other witnesses. He has also admitted the fact that the deceased was happy at her parental house. The wife of PW-4, Santokben Abhaysinh Dayra has been examined as PW-6, vide Exh-28, she has improvised the allegation of cruelty by stating that the accused used to taunt the deceased for not being fair. She has admitted that after marriage more or less the Page 9 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined deceased was staying at her parental house, and she was staying there for at least four months from the date of occurrence of the incident.
8.8 The mother of the deceased Kamlaben Dayra has been examined as PW-7, vide Exh-29, she said that she was not an eye witness to the said incident, and at the same time she has also stated that the deceased fell down into the well while fetching water from it. The prosecution has examined Rupabhai Manabhai Parmar, the Police Officer who had stated that the complaint filed vide Exh-22, has been noted by the Police Officer Gulabsinh Salubhai, and said Gulabsinh Salubhai has not been examined by the prosecution. If the entire evidence is taken into consideration, the prosecution has failed to prove that the deceased was subjected to harassment and was instigated to commit suicide.
8.9 The prosecution has examined PW-1, Dr. Mohanlal Dalchand Kuri vide Exh-10, who was the Medical Officer at PHC, Dahod, who had conducted the postmortem and the postmortem report was produced vide Exh-11, and the cause of death as stated in the postmortem report was asphyxia due to drowning. The panchnama of scene of offence is produced vide Exh-15, and the panch Samantsinh has been examined as PW-2, vide Exh-14.
Page 10 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined 8.10 The allegations that have been made are with respect to that the accused were not eating the food that was prepared by the deceased, and the Accused No.1 was having an extra marital affair with the daughter of Dhansukbhai, but the fact remains that the prosecution has not been able to trace said Dhansukbhai or his daughter, and or prove the case that Accused No.1 had an extra martial affair with the daughter of Dhansukbhai. Moreover, the fact also remains that the witnesses of the prosecution i.e. the family members of the deceased themselves have said that the deceased was most of the time residing at her parental house, and when the deceased used to come to her parental house the Accused No.1 was also accompanying her. 8.11 The fact that the deceased had last come to her parental house with her other daughter, Samath i.e. the sister of the deceased and her husband Jayesh, the prosecution has not examined them. Moreover, the brother of the deceased, i.e. PW-4 has also stated that one Kanubhai Dhansukbhai and Shankarbhai had come to get the deceased from her parental house, and the prosecution has also not examined the said witnesses.
8.12 Moreover, the witness who had first found out that the deceased has fallen into the well, Ramilaben, i.e. the Page 11 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined cousin of the deceased was not examined by the prosecution, and the mother of the deceased also stated that the deceased fell down while fetching the water from the well. The Sessions Court has rightly taken into consideration all the said relevant facts and acquitted the deceased from the offence under Section 498(A), 306, 114 of the IPC.
9. The evidence on record and the glaring omission on the prosecution as pointed out above leaves no room of doubt that the order passed by the trial Court is as per law. The trial Court has rightly held that there was no positive evidence on record to prove that the accused by way of the conduct or spoken words, overtly or covertly, actually aided and abetted or instigated the deceased in such a manner that it leaves no other option for the deceased but to commit suicide. In the present case, the prosecution has also not been able to prove the clear motive of the accused to commit offence of abatement. There is also no close connection between the accused's action and the deceased's choice to commit suicide. In view of the said fact, the prosecution has not been able to prove that the accused have stimulated the deceased to commit suicide.
9.1 The prosecution has not proved that there was a clear motive to commit the offence of abatement. The prosecution has also not proved that the accused proceeded to Page 12 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined encourage and/or irritate the deceased through words or insults and that the accused intended to urge the deceased to end it all by committing suicide. The prosecution has also not been able to prove the direct connection between the incitement and committal of suicide. The prosecution has also not been able to prove direct or indirect act of incitement to the commitment of suicide. The prosecution has also not been able to prove by accusation of harassment without any positive action on the part of the accused close to the time of occurrence that led and forced the deceased to commit suicide.
9.2 The present matter turns on whether the conduct attributed to the accused satisfies the legal threshold of abetment of suicide. Therefore, read as a whole, it can be said that mere occurrence of a suicide does not automatically trigger rigours of the Section. The penal consequences under Section 306 of the Indian Penal Code arise when the prosecution is able to establish that the accused abetted and had a role in provoking or facilitating that suicide. Therefore, this twin test distinction is required to be borne in mind. 9.3 Abetment, as understood in criminal jurisprudence, is not a broad moral expression but a term of precise statutory meaning. Section 107 IPC delineates its contours: Page 13 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined instigation, conspiracy, or intentional aiding. Each of these modes presupposes active involvement. The law does not punish omission except in some cases, it punishes intentional encouragement or positive facilitation of a prohibited act. 9.4 It is therefore not sufficient to show that the deceased was unhappy, distressed, or subjected to unpleasant treatment. The jurisprudence developed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court has consistently underscored that routine domestic disagreements, suspicion between spouses, or episodes of harassment do not ipso facto amount to instigation. Rigours of this Section intervene only where there is clear evidence of mens rea and a direct causal link between the accused's conduct and the decision of the deceased to commit suicide.
9.5 The concept of instigation demands something more than mere reproach or accusation. It connotes an active suggestion, an incitement, or conduct of such intensity that it operates upon the mind of the victim and pushes him or her toward this drastic and unfortunate step. The prosecution therefore, must demonstrate either a deliberate intention to drive the deceased to suicide or knowledge that the conduct in question was likely to produce that consequence. Equally indispensable is the requirement of proximity. The law insists Page 14 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined on a live and immediate nexus between the acts complained of and the suicide. A remote or generalized allegation is insufficient. There must be evidence showing that the accused engaged in conduct so closely connected in time and effect with the suicide that it can reasonably be said to have triggered the fatal act.
9.6 No material has been brought on record demonstrating any proximate act immediately preceding the suicide which could be construed as instigation. Nor is there evidence of a positive act amounting to intentional aid. The essential ingredients of abetment -namely, culpable mental state coupled with active or proximate conduct-are not established.
9.7 On an overall assessment of the evidence, the prosecution has failed to demonstrate the existence of the foundational elements necessary to sustain a conviction under Section 306 IPC.
10. In the case of Mahendra K.C. v. State of Karnataka and another, [(2022) 2 SCC 129], it has been held by the Hon'ble Supreme Court that the essence of abetment lies in instigating a person to do a thing or the intentional doing of that thing by an act or illegal omission. Instigation Page 15 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined is to goad, urge forward, provoke, incite or encourage to do "an act". To satisfy the requirement of instigation though it is not necessary that actual words must be used to that effect or what constitutes instigation must necessarily and specifically be suggestive of the consequence. Yet a reasonable certainty to incite the consequence must be capable of being spelt out. A word uttered in the fit of anger or emotion without intending the consequences to actually follow cannot be said to be instigation.
10.1 In the case of Mahendra Awase v. State of Madhya Pradesh, 2025 (1) Crimes 347 (SC), the observations are made with regard to abetment of suicide. It has been held that in order to bring a case within purview of Section 306 IPC, there must be a case of suicide and in commission of said offence, person who is said to have abetted commission of suicide must have played active role by act of instigation or by doing certain act to facilitate commission of suicide. It has been further observed that the act of abetment by person charged with said offence must be proved and established by prosecution before he could be convicted under Section 306 IPC. It is further observed that to satisfy requirement of instigation, accused by his act or omission or by a continued course of conduct should have created such circumstances that deceased was left with no other option, Page 16 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined except to commit suicide.
10.2 In the case of Amalendu Pal alias Jhantu versus State of West Bengal, (2010) 1 SCC 707, it has been held that in a case of alleged abetment of suicide, there must be proof of direct or indirect act(s) of incitement to the commission of suicide. Merely on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the deceased to commit suicide, conviction in terms of Section 306 IPC would not be sustainable. 10.3 In the case of Rajesh v. State of Haryana, (2020) 15 SCC 359, after considering the provisions of Sections 306 and 107 of IPC, the Court held that conviction under Section 306 IPC is not sustainable on the allegation of harassment without there being any positive action proximate to the time of occurrence on the part of the accused which led or compelled the person to commit suicide. 10.4 In the case of Amudha v. State, 2024 INSC 244, it was held that there has to be an act of incitement on the part of the accused proximate to the date on which the deceased committed suicide. The act attributed should not only be proximate to the time of suicide but should also be Page 17 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined of such a nature that the deceased was left with no alternative but to take the drastic step of committing suicide.
11. Further, learned APP is not in a position to show any evidence to take a contrary view in the matter or that the approach of the Court below is vitiated by some manifest illegality or that the decision is perverse or that the Court below has ignored the material evidence on record. In above view of the matter, this Court is of the considered opinion that the Court below was completely justified in passing impugned judgment and order.
12. Considering the impugned judgment, the trial Court has recorded that there was no direct evidence connecting the accused with the incident and there are contradictions in the depositions of the prosecution witnesses. In absence of the direct evidence, it cannot be proved that the accused are involved in the offence. Further, the motive of the accused behind the incident is not established. The trial Court has rightly considered all the evidence on record and passed the impugned judgment. The trial Court has rightly evaluated the facts and the evidence on record.
13. It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal, the appellate court is not required to re-write the Page 18 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined judgment or to give fresh reasoning, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper. Such principle is down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy, reported in AIR 1981 SC 1417 wherein it is held as under:
"... This court has observed in Girija
Nandini Devi V. Bigendra Nandini
Chaudhary (1967)1 SCR 93: (AIR 1967 SC
1124) that it is not the duty of the
appellate court when it agrees with the view of the trial court on the evidence to repeat the narration of the evidence or to reiterate the reasons given by the trial court expression of general agreement with the reasons given by the Court the decision of which is under appeal, will ordinarily suffice."
14. Thus, in case the appellate court agrees with the reasons and the opinion given by the lower court, then the discussion of evidence at length is not necessary.
15. In the case of Ram Kumar v. State of Haryana, reported in AIR 1995 SC 280, Supreme Court has held as under:
"The powers of the High Court in an Page 19 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined
appeal from order of acquittal to reassess the evidence and reach its own conclusions under Sections 378 and 379, Cr.P.C. are as extensive as in any appeal against the order of conviction. But as a rule of prudence, it is desirable that the High Court should give proper weight and consideration to the view of the Trial Court with regard to the credibility of the witness, the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt and the slowness of appellate Court in justifying a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who had the advantage of seeing the witness. It is settled law that if the main grounds on which the lower Court has based its order acquitting the accused are reasonable and plausible, and the same cannot entirely and effectively be dislodged or demolished, the High Court should not disturb the order of acquittal."
16. As observed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Rajesh Singh & Others vs. State of Uttar Pradesh reported in (2011) 11 SCC 444 and in the case of Page 20 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined Bhaiyamiyan Alias Jardar Khan and Another vs. State of Madhya Pradesh reported in (2011) 6 SCC 394, while dealing with the judgment of acquittal, unless reasoning by the trial Court is found to be perverse, the acquittal cannot be upset. It is further observed that High Court's interference in such appeal in somewhat circumscribed and if the view taken by the trial Court is possible on the evidence, the High Court should stay its hands and not interfere in the matter in the belief that if it had been the trial Court, it might have taken a different view.
17. In the case of Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, reported in (2007) 4 SCC 415, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:
"42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:
(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
(2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on Page 21 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined 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 emphasise 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 Page 22 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined 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."
18. The Hon'ble Apex Court, in a recent decision, in the case of Constable 907 Surendra Singh and Another V/s State of Uttarakhand reported in (2025) 5 SCC 433, has held in paragraph 24 as under:
"24. It could thus be seen that it is a settled legal position that the interference with the finding of acquittal recorded by the learned trial Judge would be warranted by the High Court only if the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity; that the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record; and that no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record."
Page 23 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/630/2010 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 08/04/2026 undefined
19. Considering the aforesaid facts and circumstances of the case and law laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court while considering the scope of appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 no case is made out to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
20. In view of above facts and circumstances of the case, on my careful re-appreciation of the entire evidence, I found that there is no infirmity or irregularity in the findings of fact recorded by learned trial Court and under the circumstances, the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondent/s - accused for the elaborate reasons stated in the impugned judgment and I also endorse the view/finding of the learned trial Court leading to the acquittal.
21. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Criminal Appeal fails and the same deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed, accordingly. Record & Proceedings be remitted to the concerned trial Court forthwith.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J) ADITYA SINGH Page 24 of 24 Uploaded by ADITYA SINGH(HC02376) on Thu Apr 09 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Apr 09 23:18:36 IST 2026