Issue
Reasoning
Decision
Mochi Chaturbhai Kalidas
v.
State Of Gujarat
(Supreme Court Of India)
Criminal Appeal No. 452 Of 1974 | 07-03-1980
Fazal Ali, J.
This appeal has been filed under the provisions of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970. The appellant has been convicted by the High Court under Sections 302 and 364 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for 1 years respectively. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The trial court had acquitted the accused of the charges framed against him. In an appeal filed by the State the High Court reversed the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge and the appellant was convicted as indicated above.
2. We have gone through the judgment of the High Court and that of the Sessions Judge. The High Court has discussed the evidence and catalogued various circumstances which conclusively prove the guilt of the appellant. The Sessions Judge seems to have rejected the prosecution case on general grounds like, e.g., the witnesses were interested and belonged to a particular caste and has not cared to consider the intrinsic merits of the evidence. The High Court has effectively displaced all the important reasons given by the Sessions Judge in support of the acquittal and has come to the conclusion that the prosecution case has been fully proved.
3. After having gone through the judgment of and the evidence referred to by the High Court we find ourselves in entire agreement with the view taken by it. There is no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.
This appeal has been filed under the provisions of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1970. The appellant has been convicted by the High Court under Sections 302 and 364 of the Indian Penal Code and sentenced to imprisonment for life and rigorous imprisonment for 1 years respectively. Both the sentences were directed to run concurrently. The trial court had acquitted the accused of the charges framed against him. In an appeal filed by the State the High Court reversed the order of acquittal passed by the Sessions Judge and the appellant was convicted as indicated above.
2. We have gone through the judgment of the High Court and that of the Sessions Judge. The High Court has discussed the evidence and catalogued various circumstances which conclusively prove the guilt of the appellant. The Sessions Judge seems to have rejected the prosecution case on general grounds like, e.g., the witnesses were interested and belonged to a particular caste and has not cared to consider the intrinsic merits of the evidence. The High Court has effectively displaced all the important reasons given by the Sessions Judge in support of the acquittal and has come to the conclusion that the prosecution case has been fully proved.
3. After having gone through the judgment of and the evidence referred to by the High Court we find ourselves in entire agreement with the view taken by it. There is no merit in this appeal which is accordingly dismissed.
Advocates List
For
For Petitioner
- Shekhar Naphade
- Mahesh Agrawal
- Tarun Dua
For Respondent
- S. Vani
- B. Sunita Rao
- Sushil Kumar Pathak
Bench List
HON'BLE JUSTICE S.MURTAZA FAZAL ALI
HON'BLE JUSTICE A. D. KOSHAL
Eq Citation
(1982) SCC CRI 374
(1982) 2 SCC 148
LQ/SC/1980/110
HeadNote
Criminal Trial — Appreciation of evidence — Acquittal by trial court — Reversal by High Court — Conviction of appellant under Ss. 302 and 364, IPC, by High Court — No interference with, by Supreme Court
Thank you for subscribing! Please check your inbox to opt-in.
Oh no, error happened! Please check the email address and/or try again.
Deleting Note..
Are you sure you want to move this note to trash?
