Case Note & Summary
The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 against the judgment and order of acquittal dated 31.08.1999 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Sabarkantha at Himmatnagar in Sessions Case No. 40/1998. The respondents (original accused) were acquitted of offences punishable under Sections 302, 326, 323, 324, 114 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 135 of the Gujarat Police Act. During the pendency of the appeal, respondent nos. 3 and 4 expired, and the appeal against them was abated. The case of the prosecution was that on 01.11.1997 at around 17:30 hours, the complainant Galjibhai Kalabhai and other witnesses were going towards their house at Kudolpal village. The accused persons, armed with weapons, assaulted the victims. The accused no.1 assaulted Navjibhai Kalabhai on the left eye with a bow and arrow, and accused no.2 gave a blow with a sickle (dhariya) on the head of Daljibhai Nanjibhai. The trial court acquitted the accused, finding the prosecution witnesses unreliable and the evidence insufficient. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence and found that the trial court's appreciation of evidence was plausible and not perverse. The witnesses were closely related to the deceased and their testimony suffered from contradictions and improvements. The prosecution also failed to establish any motive. The High Court held that the appeal lacked merit and dismissed it, upholding the acquittal.
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 - Held that the trial court's appreciation of evidence was plausible and not perverse (Paras 1-40). B) Evidence Law - Unreliable witnesses - Interested witnesses - The prosecution witnesses were closely related to the deceased and their testimony suffered from contradictions and improvements - Held that conviction cannot be based on such unreliable testimony (Paras 20-30). C) Criminal Law - Motive - Absence of motive - The prosecution failed to establish any motive for the accused to commit the offence - Held that absence of motive is a relevant factor in assessing the prosecution case (Paras 15-18). D) Criminal Law - Benefit of doubt - Acquittal upheld - The prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt - Held that the accused are entitled to benefit of doubt (Paras 35-40).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court is perverse and liable to be set aside?
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Acquittal of respondents upheld.
Law Points
- Appeal against acquittal
- Section 378 CrPC
- presumption of innocence
- benefit of doubt
- unreliable witnesses
- lack of motive
- corroboration of evidence
