Case Note & Summary
The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment and order dated 18.08.1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha camp at Modasa, in Sessions Case No.85 of 1993, whereby the Trial Court acquitted the respondents (original accused) of the charges under Sections 302, 337, 323 and 114 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) read with Section 135 of the Bombay Police Act. The incident occurred on 05/03/1993 at about 4:00 to 4:30 p.m. near the house of the complainant, Smt. Pushpaben. According to the prosecution, the accused persons quarreled with the victim, Jagdishkumar (husband of the complainant), and inflicted stick blows and pelted stones, causing injuries to the victim and the complainant. The victim later succumbed to his injuries. The Trial Court acquitted the accused on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court, in the appeal, examined the evidence including the dying declaration of the victim, oral testimony of witnesses, and medical evidence. The Court found that the dying declaration was not reliable as it was not recorded in the presence of a Magistrate and there were inconsistencies regarding the time of recording. The oral evidence of the complainant and other witnesses was found to be contradictory and not corroborated by medical evidence. The Court held that the Trial Court's findings were not perverse and that the prosecution had failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed and the acquittal was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appeal against Acquittal - Section 378 CrPC - Scope of Interference - The High Court in an appeal against acquittal should not interfere unless the findings of the Trial Court are perverse or based on no evidence. The presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is strengthened by acquittal. (Paras 1, 14) B) Evidence Law - Dying Declaration - Reliability - A dying declaration must be consistent and free from doubt. In the present case, the dying declaration was not recorded in the presence of a Magistrate and there were inconsistencies regarding the time of recording, making it unreliable. (Paras 8-10) C) Indian Penal Code, 1860 - Sections 302, 323, 337, 114 - Murder and Hurt - Conviction requires proof beyond reasonable doubt. The prosecution failed to establish the exact role of each accused and the manner of assault, leading to acquittal. (Paras 11-13) D) Bombay Police Act, 1951 - Section 135 - Offence under - The charge under this section was not proved as the main offences under IPC were not established. (Para 13)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court is perverse and requires interference by the High Court in an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment and order of acquittal dated 18.08.1998 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha camp at Modasa in Sessions Case No.85 of 1993 is confirmed. The respondents are acquitted of all charges.
Law Points
- Appeal against acquittal
- Section 378 CrPC
- presumption of innocence
- reasonable doubt
- appreciation of evidence
- dying declaration
- oral evidence
- medical evidence
- corroboration
