Gujarat High Court Dismisses State Appeal Against Acquittal in Murder Case Due to Lack of Evidence. Acquittal of Accused Under Sections 302/34 IPC Upheld as Prosecution Failed to Prove Guilt Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

High Court: Gujarat High Court In Favour of Accused

Admin

2026-05-19 22:58:27

Font size:

Case Note & Summary

The State of Gujarat filed an appeal under Section 378(1) and (3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment dated 13.03.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (3rd Fast Track Court), Rajkot, in Sessions Case No.145 of 2000, whereby the respondents (original accused) were acquitted of the charges for offences punishable under Sections 302 read with Section 34 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The case arose from an incident on 19.06.2000, when a dead body of a priest, Mr. Raghavsharan, was found at the outskirts of Village Gauridad. The complainant, Mr. Vasantbhai Ghelabhai Ajani, lodged an FIR against 3-4 unidentified assailants. During investigation, the police arrested the respondents and filed a charge-sheet. The trial court, after examining the evidence, acquitted the accused. The State appealed, contending that the trial court had erred in acquitting the accused. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimony of witnesses, the last seen theory, motive, and recovery of the weapon. The court found that the prosecution witnesses turned hostile and did not support the case. The last seen theory was not proved as the witnesses who claimed to have seen the accused with the deceased were not reliable. The motive alleged was weak and not established. The recovery of the weapon was also not proved as the panch witnesses turned hostile. The High Court held that the trial court's findings were not perverse and that the prosecution had failed to prove the guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal was upheld.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure Code - Appeal against acquittal - Section 378 CrPC - Scope of interference - The High Court in an appeal against acquittal can interfere only if 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 1-19)

B) Indian Penal Code - Murder - Sections 302/34 IPC - Circumstantial evidence - Last seen theory - The prosecution failed to prove that the accused were last seen with the deceased. The witnesses turned hostile and the evidence of last seen was not reliable. (Paras 10-15)

C) Indian Penal Code - Murder - Sections 302/34 IPC - Motive - The prosecution failed to establish any motive for the accused to commit the murder. The alleged motive was weak and not proved. (Para 16)

D) Indian Penal Code - Murder - Sections 302/34 IPC - Recovery of weapon - The recovery of the alleged weapon of offence was not proved to be at the instance of the accused. The panch witnesses turned hostile. (Para 17)

E) Indian Penal Code - Murder - Sections 302/34 IPC - Benefit of doubt - The prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The trial court rightly gave the benefit of doubt to the accused. (Paras 18-19)

Issue of Consideration

Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Trial Court was perverse and liable to be set aside by this Court in exercise of its appellate jurisdiction under Section 378 CrPC.

Final Decision

The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot, in Sessions Case No.145 of 2000.

Law Points

Appeal against acquittal
Section 378 CrPC
Scope of interference in acquittal appeals
Presumption of innocence
Benefit of doubt
Unreliable witness testimony
Circumstantial evidence
Last seen theory
Motive
Recovery of weapon

Case Details

2026 LawText (GUJ) (01) 350

R/CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 757 of 2003

2026-01-17

M. R. Mengdey, Mool Chand Tyagi

MR H K PATEL, APP for the Appellant(s) No. 1; NOTICE SERVED for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2,3

State of Gujarat

Javendrasinh alias Jaisinh Natvarsinh Zala & Ors.

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against acquittal in a murder case.

Remedy Sought

The State of Gujarat sought to set aside the acquittal of the respondents and convict them for offences under Sections 302/34 and 188 IPC.

Filing Reason

The State challenged the judgment of acquittal passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Rajkot, in Sessions Case No.145 of 2000.

Previous Decisions

The trial court acquitted the respondents of all charges on 13.03.2003.

Issues

Whether the trial court's judgment of acquittal was perverse and liable to be set aside? Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt?

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant (State) argued that the trial court erred in acquitting the accused despite sufficient evidence, including last seen evidence and recovery of the weapon. The respondents (accused) contended that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt and that the trial court's findings were based on proper appreciation of evidence.

Ratio Decidendi

In an appeal against acquittal, the High Court can interfere only if the findings of the trial court are perverse or based on no evidence. The prosecution failed to prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt as the witnesses turned hostile, the last seen theory was not reliable, motive was not established, and recovery of weapon was not proved. Hence, the acquittal was upheld.

Judgment Excerpts

The present Appeal is filed by the Appellant – State of Gujarat under the provisions of sub-sections (1) & (3) of Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging the Judgment dated 13.03.2003 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge (3rd Fast Track Court), Rajkot in Sessions Case No.145 of 2000, whereby the Respondents herein were ordered to have been acquitted of the charges for the offences punishable under Sections 302 r/w Section 34 and 188 of the Indian Penal Code,1860. The High Court in an appeal against acquittal can interfere only if the findings of the trial court are perverse or based on no evidence.

Procedural History

The FIR was lodged on 19.06.2000. Charge-sheet was filed. Trial commenced in Sessions Case No.145 of 2000. The trial court acquitted the accused on 13.03.2003. The State filed the present appeal on 17.01.2026.