AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
1,Documents,Exh.
1,Complaint.,22
2,Panchanama of scene of offence,40
3,Panchanama of recovery of weapon.,43-47
4,Yadi given by Doctor to police.,58
5,Medical certificate of Sumitraben.,59
6,Medical certificate of Rajubhai Punambhai.,60
7,Medical certificate of Bhailalbhai Punjabha,61
8,Medical certificate of Jasbhai Punjabha.,62
9,Medical certificate of Punambhai Bachubhai .,63
10,Sevigram.,66
11,Special report,67
12,Police Yadi for obtaining medical certificate,71
herein above, the prosecution is duty bound to establish intention and knowledge on the part of the respondents accused, which in the present case is",,
not proved. Based on such evidence, learned Trial Judge has recorded finding of acquittal as prosecution has failed to establish essential ingredients of",,
sections 143, 147, 148, 307, 504 read with section 149 of Indian Penal Code for which the respondents accused were charged and tried. Thus, on our",,
own analysis and re-appreciation of the evidence, we do not find any infirmities or compelling reason to interfere with the order of acquittal recorded",,
by the learned Trial Judge.,,
It is a cardinal principle of criminal jurisprudence that in an acquittal appeal if other view is possible, then also, the appellate Court cannot substitute",,
its own view by reversing the acquittal into conviction, unless the findings of the trial Court are perverse, contrary to the material on record, palpably",,
wrong, manifestly erroneous or demonstrably unsustainable. (Ramesh Babulal Doshi V. State of Gujarat (1996) 9 SCC 225). In the instant case, the",,
learned APP has not been able to point out to us as to how the findings recorded by the learned trial Court are perverse, contrary to material on",,
record, palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous or demonstrably unsustainable.",,
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 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.""",,
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 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 learned 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 learned 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.",,
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, no case is made out to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.",,
In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, present application for leave to appeal being Criminal Misc. Application No.23177 of 2021",,
fails and same deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed. In view of dismissal of the application for leave to appeal, Criminal Appeal",,
No.2051 of 2021 also deserves to be dismissed and is accordingly dismissed.,,