State Of Gujarat vs Vinubhai Nanabhai Maachhi on 14 July, 2026

    0
    7
    ADVERTISEMENT

    Gujarat High Court

    State Of Gujarat vs Vinubhai Nanabhai Maachhi on 14 July, 2026

                                                                                                                 NEUTRAL CITATION
    
    
    
    
                                  R/CR.A/223/2014                              JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026
    
                                                                                                                 undefined
    
    
    
    
                                       IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
    
                              R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 223 of 2014
    
    
                            FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:
    
    
                            HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
    
                            ==========================================
                                    Approved for Reporting              Yes   No
                                                                              ✔
                            ==========================================
                                                    STATE OF GUJARAT
                                                           Versus
                                          VINUBHAI NANABHAI MAACHHI & ORS.
                            ==========================================
                            Appearance:
                            MS JIRGA JHAVERI APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1
                            MR BOMI H SETHNA(5864) WITH MR CHINTAN DESAI for the
                            Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3,4
                            ==========================================
    
                                 CORAM:HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK
    
                                                           Date : 14/07/2026
    
                                                           ORAL JUDGMENT

    1. The appellant – State of Gujarat has preferred this appeal under
    Section 378(1)(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the
    judgment and order dated 16.04.2012 passed by the learned 8 th (Ad-
    hoc) Additional District and Additional Sessions Judge, Panchmahal @
    Godhra (hereinafter be referred to as “the Trial Court”) in Sessions
    Case No.119 of 2010, whereby the trial Court has acquitted the
    original accused (respondents herein) for the offence punishable
    under Sections 306, 498(A), 114 etc of the Indian Penal Code

    Page 1 of 16

    SPONSORED

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    [hereafter be referred to as “the IPC“].

    2. Short facts of the prosecution case are that prior to one year
    from the date of incident, the marriage of Chandrikaben was
    solemnized with accused No.1 at Village” Aagarvada and she was
    residing along with in-laws. It is alleged that after short span of
    marriage life, the accused caused physical and mental harassment to
    Chandrikaben on the ground of household work and dowry and as and
    when she went to her parental home, she complained about
    harassment caused by the accused to her parents, but the parents
    sent back her at matrimonial home by persuading her. It is further
    alleged that on 15.05.2010, at about 7.30 hours at Village: Aagarvada
    at the resident of accused, Chandrikaben by pouring kerosene her set
    at ablaze on fire and committed suicide, due to which complaint being
    C.R. No.I – 38/2010 was lodged by the complainant before Kothamba
    Police Station for the aforesaid offences. The police prepared
    panchnama of the scene of offence and after preparing the arrest
    panchnama, the accused came to be arrested. On completion of
    investigation, charge sheet was submitted into the Court of learned
    J.M.F.C.

    2.1 The charge against the accused came to be framed by the trial
    Court vide Exhibit 4 for the aforesaid offences against the accused.
    On being explained it to them, the accused have denied having
    committed any offence. The accused pleaded not guilty to the charge
    and pleaded for trial and hence, the case was tried by the learned
    Additional Sessions Judge.

    3. It appears from the records that to prove the case, the
    prosecution has examined the witnesses and in addition to this, the

    Page 2 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    prosecution has also produced the documentary evidence.

    4. After closure of the evidence, the statements of the accused
    under section 313 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 have been
    recorded wherein they denied of having committed any offence and
    have stated that they are innocent.

    5. 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.

    6. Being aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the aforesaid judgment
    and order of acquittal the appellant – State of Gujarat has preferred
    this appeal.

    7. Heard Ms.Jirga Jhaveri, learned Additional Public Prosecutor for
    the appellant – State of Gujarat, Mr.Bomi Sethna, learned counsel for
    respondents at length.

    8. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor appearing for the
    appellant – State of Gujarat has submitted the same facts which are
    narrated in the memo of appeal and has also submitted that the
    prosecution has examined witnesses and produced documentary
    evidence, despite this fact, the trial Court has not considered the
    same in its true and proper perspective in passing the judgment and
    order of acquittal. She, while referring to the entire oral as well as
    documentary evidence, has assailed the impugned judgment and
    order and submitted that the trial Court has not taken into
    consideration the evidence connecting the accused to the alleged
    offence in its proper perspective and even the prosecution has been
    able to prove the charges levelled against the accused. While

    Page 3 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    referring to the evidence of the witnesses and the material collected
    against the accused, learned Additional Public Prosecutor has
    submitted that the prosecution has established the case against the
    accused by examining the witnesses, who have supported the case of
    the prosecution, however, the trial Court has discarded and
    disbelieved the evidence of these witnesses. She has submitted that
    the witnesses have fully supported the case of the prosecution,
    however, the trial Court has not appreciated the same and passed the
    judgment and order of acquittal which is illegal and unjust. She has
    submitted that it is settled legal position that the evidence of a single
    witness is sufficient for conviction if the same is reliable and
    trustworthy and in the present case, though the evidence of all the
    witnesses are reliable and trustworthy, without any cogent reason,
    the trial Court has disbelieved and discarded the evidence of the
    witnesses.

    8.1 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has further submitted that
    the impugned judgment of acquittal is contrary to the evidence on
    record, based on erroneous appreciation of material evidence, and
    has resulted in a miscarriage of justice and the findings recorded by
    the learned Trial Court are perverse and unsustainable in law, thereby
    calling for interference by this Court in the exercise of its appellate
    jurisdiction. She has also submitted that the learned Trial Court has
    materially erred in holding that the prosecution has failed to prove its
    case beyond reasonable doubt and the findings recorded by the trial
    Court were therefore perverse, illegal, and contrary to the evidence
    on record.

    8.2 Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has submitted that the
    accused have harassed mentally and physically to the deceased and

    Page 4 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    induced her to commit suicide and thereby accused abetted each
    other in committing suicide, despite of this fact, the Trial Court has
    acquitted the accused for the alleged offence. She has submitted that
    the prosecution has examined P.W.5 – complainant, who has fully
    supported the case of the prosecution and the complaint filed by him
    and he deposed that after short span of marriage, the accused caused
    physical and mental harassment to the deceased on the ground of
    insufficient dowry. She has submitted that the Trial Court has
    disbelieved and discarded the evidence of P.W.5, P.W.8, P.W.9,
    P.W.10, P.W.12 and P.W.13 on the ground that they were the father,
    villagers, mother, uncle and aunt of the deceased and not trustworthy
    and reliable. She has further submitted that such incident occurred in
    the house of the accused and the evidence of the father, villagers,
    mother, uncle and aunt of the deceased enough to prove the guilt of
    the accused, however, the Trial Court has discarded and disbelieved
    the evidence of these witnesses and committed an error in acquitting
    the accused. She has also submitted that the Trial Court has given
    undue importance to minor omissions and contradictions while
    arriving at the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove the
    charges levelled against the accused, which resulted in miscarriage of
    justice.

    8.3 According to learned Additional Public Prosecutor, the trial Court
    ought to have convicted the accused and ought to have imposed
    necessary sentence. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor has prayed
    to allow the present appeal and to quash and set aside the impugned
    judgment and order of acquittal.

    9. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondents has supported
    the impugned judgment and order and has submitted that the trial

    Page 5 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    Court has not committed any error of law and fact in acquitting the
    accused from the charges levelled against them. He has submitted
    that the ingredients of the offence alleged against the accused are
    not proved beyond reasonable doubt and, therefore, the trial Court
    has rightly acquitted the accused as the complainant has failed to
    prove the charge levelled against the accused. He has also submitted
    that there is no iota of evidence to connect the accused with the
    alleged crime in question. He has submitted that the evidence led by
    the prosecution suffers from material contradictions, omissions, and
    inconsistencies, which create serious doubt about the veracity of the
    prosecution case and the prosecution has failed to establish the
    essential ingredients of the alleged offences and has not produced
    reliable, trustworthy, and corroborative evidence connecting the
    respondent with the commission of the alleged offence. He has
    submitted that it is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that
    the presumption of innocence in favour of an accused is further
    strengthened by an order of acquittal. It is submitted that unless the
    findings recorded by the trial Court are shown to be perverse, illegal,
    or contrary to the evidence on record, the Appellate Court should be
    slow in interfering with an order of acquittal. It is submitted that the
    appellant has failed to point out any infirmity, illegality, perversity, or
    misreading of evidence in the impugned judgment and order and the
    findings recorded by the learned trial Court are based upon proper
    appreciation of the evidence and settled legal principles. Learned
    counsel for the respondents has submitted that the appeal being
    meritless deserves to be dismissed and the impugned judgment and
    order of acquittal deserves to be confirmed.

    10. On perusal of the impugned judgment and order of acquittal
    passed by the trial Court, the questions arise for determination are as

    Page 6 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    under:-

    (1) whether the trial Court has rightly justified in passing the
    judgment and order of acquittal.

    (2) whether the trial Court has rightly appreciated the oral as well
    as documentary evidence led by the prosecution in recording
    the reasons.

    (3) whether there is any illegality, irregularity and perversity in
    the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.

    11. Considering the facts of the present case, it appears that on
    15.05.2010 at about 7.30 a.m., when Chandrikaben committed
    suicide by pouring kerosene on her and ignited herself due to which
    she sustained 100% burn injury on her body and succumbed to the
    injury on the spot. Therefore, the complainant Nanabhai has lodged
    the FIR against respondent No.1 being husband, respondent No.2 and
    respondent No.3 being parents of respondent No.1 and respondent
    No.4 being sister of respondent No.1 have committed the offence
    under Sections 498A, 306, 114 etc of the IPC and under Section 3 and
    7 of the Dowry Prohibition Act and on the said aspect, the FIR came to
    be lodged against the accused. On perusal of the evidence of P.W.5
    Nanabhai Virabhai (Exhibit 21) is the father of the deceased, P.W.10
    Moghiben Nanabhai (Exhibit 28) is the mother of the deceased,
    P.W.12 Rayjibhai Virabhai (Exhibit 32) and P.W.13 Shantaben
    Rayjibhai (Exhibit 33) are the uncle and aunt of the deceased, P.W.11
    Dr.Mukeshgiri Shivgiri Goswami (Exhibit 29) is the doctor who
    performed the postmortem and P.W.14 Mahendrasinh Natvarsinh
    (Exhibit 35) and P.W.15 Aavardan Umedsinh Gadhvi (Exhibit 37) are
    the police witnesses. Now, considering the facts of the case that the
    complainant Nanabhai has lodged the complaint against the accused.

    Page 7 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    Before registering the complaint, the entry under Section 174
    registered by the husband of the deceased (respondent No.1) that on
    15.05.2010, respondent No.1 has disclosed the fact before the
    jurisdictional police that at Village: Agarwada, his wife i.e.
    Chandrikaben had died on account of accidental death and, therefore,
    the investigation was carried out to that effect. On the basis of the
    said accidental death entry, inquest panchnama was drawn and the
    statements of the witnesses have been recorded in connection with
    the accidental death. Whereas, the FIR came to be registered by the
    father of the deceased on the next day i.e. on 15.05.2010 wherein it
    was alleged that his daughter (deceased) was married to respondent
    No.1. As it was second marriage of both the husband and wife and
    deceased was earlier married at Village: Hadod and that marriage was
    consumed for a period of one year, ultimately the said marriage was
    dissolved and she was divorced. Thereafter, after about six months,
    the deceased again re-married to respondent No.1 before about one
    year of the incident and after her marriage, the deceased started to
    reside with the respondents at her matrimonial home. On the date of
    incident, respondent No.1 left for his routine work for selling of spicy
    items nearby villages on his scooter and in the midday when the
    scooter was stopped on account of some mechanical fault at that time
    he received a telephone call from his friend that something happened
    at his home and on receipt of the said message, respondent No.1
    reached to the home and shown that Chandrikaben lying on the floor
    in burn conditions and she was already expired and, therefore, he
    informed the jurisdictional police and same was recorded as an
    accidental death. Thereafter, when the complaint was registered by
    the complainant being father of the deceased has stated that she was
    harassed and tortured mentally and physically by the accused on
    account of household work, lack of dowry and another reason that she

    Page 8 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    was not conceiving a child and unable to conceive the child. Looking
    to the evidence of the complainant, it emerges that the tendency of
    the deceased was stated by the complainant that at the first marriage
    on account of her temperament she returned home as divorce had
    taken place with the first husband. It is come on record during the
    course of examination of P.W.5 that after returning to her parental
    home, after getting divorce from the first husband, the mother of the
    deceased has scolded her about some household work and on
    account of that deceased consumed the Uria used for the purpose of
    agriculture and due to that she was admitted in the hospital and,
    thereafter, she again married to respondent No.1. After her marriage
    and after about six months, the deceased conceived pregnancy and
    during the course of pregnancy, the miscarriage had taken place due
    to which she visited her parental home and again respondent No.1
    brought back her at matrimonial home. At that time, the brother of
    the deceased who was aged about 14 years accompanied the
    deceased with respondent No.1 and stayed together for at least ten
    days at the home of the respondents and, thereafter, he returned to
    his village. During the course of wedlock, an elder sister of the
    deceased, who was because of paralysis attack admitted in the
    hospital where the deceased along with her husband visited and after
    discharging, they went to home of sister of the deceased and all these
    facts were admitted by the complainant in his evidence. There are
    certain facts which are not stated in the statement or in the complaint
    and the said facts stated for the first time before the trial Court and
    such omission and contradiction was proved through the evidence of
    the Investigating Officer.

    12. Considering and scrutinizing the evidence of the complainant, it
    emerges that the accused were not treated the deceased well and

    Page 9 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    they were also demanding the dowry. From the evidence of the
    complainant, it reveals that he has helped by giving advance of
    Rs.25,000/- to respondent No.1, out of which respondent No.1 had
    returned Rs.10,000/- to the complainant and now remaining amount
    of Rs.11,000/- was to be returned by respondent No.1 to the
    complainant. The fact about demand of amount is completely falsified
    by the evidence of the complainant. Now, the fact with regard to
    harassment mentally and physically on account of non-conceiving the
    child is also washed away by the fact that she was carrying pregnancy
    and during this pregnancy, the miscarriage was taken place and that
    fact is come on record through the evidence of the complainant
    himself and therefore the same reason is also falsified by the
    evidence of this witness. Looking to the evidence of the Investigating
    Officer, the facts which are come on record, are not stated by the
    complainant or other witnesses at the time of recording their
    statements by the jurisdictional police and now they are stated before
    the trial Court for the first time. On perusal of the evidence of the
    witnesses i.e. parents and uncle and aunt of the deceased, it appears
    that no truthful is found from their evidence and there is major
    inconsistency in the evidence found by the trial Court.

    13. So far as the provisions of Sections 498A, 306 and 114 of the
    IPC is concerned, the basic ingredients of the provisions read as
    under:-

    “498A. Husband or relative of husband of a woman
    subjecting her to cruelty.–

    Whoever, being the husband or the relative of the husband
    of a woman, subjects such woman to cruelty shall be
    punished with imprisonment for a term which may extend
    to three years and shall also be liable to fine.

    Page 10 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026

    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    Explanation.– For the purpose of this section, “cruelty”

    means–

    (a) any wilful conduct which is of such a nature as is
    likely to drive the woman to commit suicide or to cause
    grave injury or danger to life, limb or health (whether
    mental or physical) of the woman; or

    (b) harassment of the woman where such harassment is
    with a view to coercing her or any person related to her to
    meet any unlawful demand for any property or valuable
    security or is on account of failure by her or any person
    related to her to meet such demand.

    306. Abetment of suicide.–

    If any person commits suicide, whoever abets the
    commission of such suicide, shall be punished with
    imprisonment of either description for a term which may
    extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine.

    114. Abettor present when offence is committed.–

    Whenever any person, who is absent would be liable to be
    punished as an abettor, is present when the act or offence
    for which he would be punishable in consequence of the
    abetment is committed, he shall be deemed to have
    committed such act or offence.”

    14. The ingredients of the said provisions are satisfied in the facts
    of the case. So far as the inference under Section 113(A) and (B) of
    the Evidence Act are concerned, at least some evidence is required to
    be produced by the prosecution to prove either ill-treatment or
    harassment or demand or household work. In the present case, there
    is no evidence come forth and led by the prosecution with regard to
    ill-treatment or harassment meted out to the deceased. It is a case
    put forward by the prosecution that before about ten days of the
    incident, the deceased visited her parental home and returned back
    to her matrimonial home with her younger brother Manoj, who was
    the best witness to prove the charge of harassment, but the

    Page 11 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    prosecution has neither recorded his statement nor examined him as
    a witness to prove the charge of ill-treatment or harassment meted
    out to the deceased.

    15. It is beneficiary to referred to the decisions in the case of (1)
    Ramesh Kumar Vs. State of Chhattisgarth reported in (2001) 9 SCC
    618, (2) State of Gujarat Vs. Bhaveshbhai Manilalbhai Patel reported
    in 2025 (2) GLR 923, (3) Ram Pyarey Vs. State of Uttar Pradesh
    reported in (2025) 6 SCC 820, (4) State of Gujarat Vs. Haji Haroon
    Meman reported in 2026 (0) JX (Guj) 105 and (5) State of Gujarat Vs.
    Ashwinbhai Naginbhai Tandel reported in 2025 (0) JX(Guj) 357.

    16. In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that the trial
    Court, while recording the reasons in para 8.1 to 8.17 onward, has
    dealt with the evidence of the witnesses in detail and in para 8.18 to
    20, the trial Court has assigned cogent and convincing reason that
    why the trial Court has disbelieved the case of the prosecution with
    regard to the harassment or ill-treatment or any cruelty meted out to
    the deceased on account of either on household work or on demand
    of dowry or non-conceiving the child is completely falsified from
    evidence and, therefore, the trial Court has rightly disbelieved the
    case against the accused. The prosecution has not given any
    evidence or proof with regard to the fact that whether respondent
    No.4 being sister of respondent No.1, was married or unmarried or
    residing with respondents, there was no such evidence come on
    record. So far as other respondents’ allegations against the parents of
    respondent No.1 are concerned, there was no satisfactory evidence
    brought by the prosecution with regard to ill-treatment or harassment
    caused to the deceased by other respondents and under such
    circumstances, the trial Court has disbelieved the charge levelled

    Page 12 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    against the accused and acquitted them.

    17. It is well settled by catena of decisions that an Appellate Court
    has full power to review, re-appreciate 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 their innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened
    by the trial Court.

    18. 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 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

    Page 13 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    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 they are charged.

    19. 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 in the case of Rajesh Prasad Vs. State of Bihar and
    another
    , 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, we are in complete agreement with the findings recorded by
    the trial Court.

    20. 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:

    “42. …. (1) An appellate court has full power to review,
    reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the

    Page 14 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    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 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

    Page 15 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026
    NEUTRAL CITATION

    R/CR.A/223/2014 JUDGMENT DATED: 14/07/2026

    undefined

    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.”

    21. 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.

    22. 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 evidence on record and in acquitting the
    accused from the charges levelled against them. Even on re-
    appreciation 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.

    23. 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 passed by the trial Court is
    hereby confirmed. Bail bond stands cancelled. Record and
    proceedings be sent back to the concerned Trial Court forthwith.

    (HEMANT M. PRACHCHHAK,J)
    V.R. PANCHAL

    Page 16 of 16

    Uploaded by V.R. PANCHAL(HC00171) on Thu Jul 16 2026 Downloaded on : Fri Jul 17 01:13:06 IST 2026



    Source link

    LEAVE A REPLY

    Please enter your comment!
    Please enter your name here