Gujarat High Court
Harshadbhai Govindbhai Katrodiya vs Bharatkumar Ramanlal Purohit on 25 March, 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION
R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026
undefined
Reserved On : 16/03/2026
Pronounced On : 25/03/2026
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD
R/CRIMINAL APPEAL (AGAINST ACQUITTAL) NO. 1528 of 2018
==========================================================
HARSHADBHAI GOVINDBHAI KATRODIYA
Versus
BHARATKUMAR RAMANLAL PUROHIT & ORS.
==========================================================
Appearance:
MR NIKHILESH J SHAH(3007) for the Appellant(s) No. 1
MR JEET PATEL FOR MR HRIDAY BUCH(2372) for the
Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR. KULDEEP D VAIDYA(7045) for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 1,2
MR TIRTHRAJ PANDYA, APP for the Opponent(s)/Respondent(s) No. 3
==========================================================
CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE SANJEEV J.THAKER
CAV JUDGMENT
1. Feeling aggrieved by and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of acquittal dated 13.12.2017, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar, in Criminal Appeal No.76 of 2015, for the offences punishable under Section 23(1) of the Pre-Conception and Pre-Natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Act, 1994, (for short, 'the Act, 1994') and Section 6 of the Indian Medical Degrees Act, 1916 (for short, 'the Act, 1916') the appellant - Authority has preferred this appeal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short, "the Code").
2. The prosecution case as unfolded during the trial before the Sessions Court is that the accused were running Page 1 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined Krishna Maternity and Sonography Clinic at Sihor, District :
Bhavnagar; the place was visited by Block Health Officer and Executive Magistrate, Sihor and found that the accused No.1
- Dr.Bharatkumar Purohit breached the provisions of the Act, 1994; that the patient - Kavuben Ashokbhai Solanki alleged that though he was not qualified to use the sonography machine, he made sonography test on her. It was also found that there was a poster affixed in a Clinic of Akrol of Pharmaceutical Company, which indicates that the sex could be determined by the sign; that the required Form `F' and `G' were not filled out duly by the examining doctor, and also the copy of the Act, 1994 was found illegible by the common people. On the basis of the same, the complaint was filed on 15.02.2008 and the offence under Sections 22(3), 23(1), 25 and 29(1) of the PC & PNDT Act and Sections 6, 6(A), 7 and 8 of the Indian Medical Degrees Act, 1916 were registered before the Sihor Police Station and after due investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against both the accused.
3. The learned trial Court, after recording the depositions of the complainant and other witnesses and after appreciation of evidence, convicted both the accused for the offence under Section 23(1) of the Act, 1994 and ordered to undergo rigorous punishment of 2 years and fine of Page 2 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined Rs.10,000/- each and in default thereof, imposed further imprisonment of 3 months. The learned trial Court has convicted accused No.1 - Dr.Bharatkumar R. Purohit for the offence under Section 6 of the Act, 1916 and imposed a penalty of Rs.250/-, and in default thereof, ordered to undergo rigorous imprisonment for one day.
4. Being aggrieved by the said judgment of the learned trial Court, the accused filed an appeal before the learned Sessions Court. The learned Sessions Court, by the impugned judgment, acquitted the accused from the said offences, which is challenged by way of this appeal by the complainant-Authority.
5. Learned advocate for the appellant - Authority has pointed out the facts of the case and having taken this Court through both, oral and documentary evidence, recorded before the learned trial Court, would submit that the learned trial Court has failed to appreciate the evidence in true sense and perspective; and that the trial Court has committed error in acquitting the accused. It is submitted that the learned trial Court ought not to have given much emphasis to the contradictions and/or omissions appearing in the evidence and ought to have given weightage to the dots that connect the accused with the offence in question. It is Page 3 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined submitted that the learned trial Court has erroneously come to the conclusion that the prosecution has failed to prove its case. It is also submitted that the learned Judge ought to have seen that the evidence produced on record is reliable and believable and it was proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused had committed an offence in question. It is, therefore, submitted that this Court may allow this appeal by appreciating the evidence led before the learned trial Court.
6. As against that, learned advocate/s for the respondent/s would support the impugned judgment passed by the learned trial Court and has submitted that the learned trial Court has not committed any error in acquitting the accused. The trial Court has taken possible view as the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt. Therefore, it is prayed to dismiss the present appeal by confirming the impugned judgment and order passed by the learned Sessions Court.
7. I have heard the submissions made by the learned advocates for the respective parties and also gone through the oral and documentary evidence, independently and dispassionately.
7.1 Before considering the facts of the present case, it Page 4 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined is required to refer to the certain provisions of the PC & PNDT Act, 1994, which are as under:
"17. Appropriate Authority and Advisory Committee -
(1) The Central Government shall appoint, by notification in the Official Gazette, one or more Appropriate Authorities for each of the Union territories for the purposes of this Act.
(2) The State Government shall appoint, by notification in the Official Gazette, one or more Appropriate Authorities for the whole or part of the State for the purposes of this Act having regard to the intensity of the problem of pre-natal sex determination leading to female foeticide.
(3) The officers appointed as Appropriate Authorities under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be,--
(a) when appointed for the whole of the State or the Union territory, consisting of the following three members:-
i) an officer of or above the rank of the Joint Director of Health and Family Welfare- Chairperson;
ii) an eminent woman representing women's organization; and Page 5 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined
iii) an officer of Law Department of the State or the Union territory concerned:
Provided that it shall be the duty of the State or the Union territory concerned to constitute multi-member State or Union territory level Appropriate Authority within three months of the coming into force of the Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Regulation and Prevention of Misuse) Amendment Act, 2002:
Provided further that any vacancy occurring therein shall be filled within three months of that occurrence;]
(b) when appointed for any part of the State or the Union territory, of such other rank as the State Government or the Central Government, as the case may be, may deem fit.
(4) The Appropriate Authority shall have the following functions, namely:--
(a) to grant, suspend or cancel registration of a Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic;
(b) to enforce standards prescribed for the Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory and Genetic Clinic;
(c) to investigate complaints of breach of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder and take immediate action;Page 6 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined
(d) to seek and consider the advice of the Advisory Committee, constituted under sub-section (5), on application for registration and on complaints for suspension or cancellation of registration;
(e) to take appropriate legal action against the use of any sex selection technique by any person at any place, suo motu or brought to its notice and also to initiate independent investigations in such matter;
(f) to create public awareness against the practice of sex selection or pre-natal determination of sex;
(g) to supervise the implementation of the provisions of the Act and rules;
(h) to recommend to the CSB and State Boards modifications required in the rules in accordance with changes in technology or social conditions;
(i) to take action on the recommendations of the Advisory Committee made after investigation of complaint for suspension or cancellation of registration;] (5) The Central Government or the State Government, as the case may be, shall constitute an Advisory Committee for each Appropriate Authority to aid and advise the Appropriate Authority in the discharge of its functions, and shall appoint one of the members of the Advisory Page 7 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined Committee to be its Chairman.
(6) The Advisory Committee shall consist of--
(a) three medical experts from amongst gynaecologists, obstericians, paediatricians and medical geneticists;
(b) one legal expert;
(c) one officer to represent the department dealing with information and publicity of the State Government or the Union territory, as the case may be;
(d) three eminent social workers of whom not less than one shall be from amongst representatives of women's organisations.
[(7) No person who has been associated with the use or promotion of pre-natal diagnostic technique for determination of sex or sex selection shall be appointed as a member of the Advisory Committee.] (8) The Advisory Committee may meet as and when it thinks fit or on the request of the Appropriate Authority for consideration of any application for registration or any complaint for suspension or cancellation of registration and to give advice thereon:
Provided that the period intervening Page 8 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined between any two meetings shall not exceed the prescribed period.
(9) The terms and conditions subject to which a person may be appointed to the Advisory Committee and the procedure to be followed by such Committee in the discharge of its functions shall be such as may be prescribed.
17A. Powers of Appropriate Authorities.- The Appropriate Authority shall have the powers in respect of the following matters, namely :-
a) summoning of any person who is in possession of any information relating to violation of the provisions of this Act or the rules made thereunder;
b) production of any document or material object relating to clause (a);
c) issuing search warrant for any place suspected to be indulging in sex selection techniques or pre- natal sex determination; and
d) any other matter which may be prescribed.]
28. Cognizance of offences.
(1) No court shall take cognizance of an offence under this Act except on a complaint made by--
(a) the Appropriate Authority concerned, or any officer authorised in this behalf by the Central Page 9 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined Government or State Government, as the case may be, or the Appropriate Authority; or
(b) a person who has given notice of not less than fifteen days in the manner prescribed, to the Appropriate Authority, of the alleged offence and of his intention to make a complaint to the court. Explanation.--For the purpose of this clause, "person" includes a social organisation.
(2) No court other than that of a Metropolitan Magistrate or a Judicial Magistrate of the first class shall try any offence punishable under this Act.
(3) Where a complaint has been made under clause (b) of subsection (1), the court may, on demand by such person, direct the Appropriate Authority to make available copies of the relevant records in its possession to such person.
30. Power to search and seize records, etc. - (1) If the Appropriate Authority has reason to believe that an offence under this Act has been or is being committed at any Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic or any other place, such Authority or any officer authorised thereof in this behalf may, subject to such rules as may be prescribed, enter and search Page 10 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined at all reasonable times with such assistance, if any, as such authority or officer considers necessary, such Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory or Genetic Clinic or any other place and examine any record, register, document, book, pamphlet, advertisement or any other material object found therein and seize and seal the same if such Authority or officer has reason to believe that it may furnish evidence of the commission of an office punishable under this Act.
(2) The provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974) relating to searches and seizures shall, so far as may be, apply to every search or seizure made under this Act."
Rule 12 of the Pre-conception and Pre-natal Diagnostic Techniques (Prohibition of Sex Selection) Rules, 1996, reads as under :
"12. Procedure for search and seizure -
(1) The Appropriate Authority or any officer authorized in this behalf may enter and search at all reasonable times any Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Imaging Centre or Ultrasound Clinic in the presence of two or more independent witnesses for the purposes of search and examination of Page 11 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined any record, register, document, book, pamphlet, advertisement, or any other material object found therein and seal and seize the same if there is reason to believe that it may furnish evidence of commission of an offence punishable under the Act.
Explanation: In these Rules (1) 'Genetic Laboratory/Genetic Clinic/Genetic Counselling Centre' would include an ultrasound center/imaging center/nursing home/hospital/ institute or any other place, by whatever name called, where any of the machines or equipments capable of selection of sex before or after conception or performing any procedure, technique or test for prenatal detection of sex of foetus is used;
(s) 'material object' would include records, machines and equipments; and (3) 'seize' and 'seizure' would include 'seal' and 'sealing' respectively.
(2) A list of any document, record, register, book, pamphlet, advertisement or any other material object found in the Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic or Imaging Centre and seized Page 12 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined shall be prepared in duplicate at the place of effecting the seizure. Both copies of such list shall be signed on every page by the Appropriate Authority or the officer authorized in this behalf and by the witnesses to the seizure:
Provided that the list may be prepared, in the presence of the witnesses, at a place other than the place of seizure if, for reasons to be recorded in writing, it is not practicable to make the list at the place of effecting the seizure.
(3) One copy of the list referred to in sub-
rule-(2) shall be handed over, under acknowledgement, to the person from whose custody the document, record, register, book, pamphlet, advertisement or any other material object have been seized:
Provided that a copy of the list of such document, record, register, book, pamphlet, advertisement or other material object seized may be delivered under acknowledgment, or sent by registered post to the owner or manager of the Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic or Imaging Centre, if no person acknowledging Page 13 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined custody of the document, record, register, book, pamphlet, advertisement or other material object seized is available at the place of effecting the seizure.
(4) If any material object seized is perishable in nature, the Appropriate Authority, or the officer authorized in this behalf shall make arrangements promptly for sealing, identification and preservation of the material object and also convey it to a facility for analysis or test, if analysis or test be required:
Provided that the refrigerator or other equipment used by the Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic and Imaging Centre for preserving such perishable material object may be sealed until such time as arrangements can be made for safe removal of such perishable material object and in such eventuality, mention of keeping the material object seized, on the premises of the Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic, Ultrasound Clinic or Imaging Centre shall be made in the list of seizure.Page 14 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026
NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined (5) In the case of noncompletion of search and seizure operation, the Appropriate Authority or the officer authorized in this behalf may make arrangement, by way of mounting a guard or sealing of the premises of the Genetic Counselling Centre, Genetic Laboratory, Genetic Clinic Ultrasound Clinic or Imaging Centre, for safe keeping, listing and removal of documents, records, book or any other material object to be seized, and to prevent any tampering with such documents, records, books or any other material object."
7.2 Therefore, the foremost fact which was required to be proved by the complainant was that the complaint was the appropriate authority, as defined under Section 2(a) of the Act. Moreover, the said Act, more particularly, Section 28 also states that the Court cannot take cognizance of the offence, except on a complaint made by the appropriate authorities. In the present case, the complainant has not produced any document to prove the said fact that it was the appropriate authority prescribed under the Act. Therefore, the most important factor that was required was to prove that the complainant herein had the power to search and seize the records as provided under Section 30 of the Act.
Page 15 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined 7.3 Moreover, Rule 12 of the Rules says that the procedure for search and seizure of the same also has to be done by the appropriate authority or any officer authorized in this behalf, however, the fact remains that neither the notification nor any document has been produced by the complainant stating that they are the appropriate authority or the officer authorized in that behalf.
7.4 Moreover, if the panchanama produced vide Exh.33 is taken into consideration, the same states of sealing such machinery, but as per Rule 12(2) of the Rules, the list of documents have to be prepared in duplicate at the place of effecting seizure and both the copies of such list have to be signed on every page by the officer authorized or witnesses to the seizure. The fact remains that, even as per the deposition of the complainant witness viz., Dr.Vijaybhai Jivrajbhai Kanani, who has been examined vide Exh.35, it has been stated that only the panchanama (Exh.33) has been prepared; and that he does not state that the same has been prepared in duplicate; and that though in the said panchanama, there is a signature of accused No.1, but the same does not state that one copy has been handed over to accused No.1. Moreover, it transpires from the record that the said sonography machine belongs to accused No.2 and there is no iota of evidence produced by the complainant to Page 16 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined prove that copy of the said panchanama has been given to accused No.2.
7.5 Moreover, if the statement given by the patient viz., Kavuben Ashokbhai Solanki, who had come for treatment at clinic of accused, which is produced vide Exh.50, is taken into consideration, and considering her deposition, vide Exh.52, it transpires that as she was having liver pain, she had come to the hospital, but she does not state that, she has been examined by accused No.1, by sonography machine.
7.6 Moreover, even the complaint (Exh.17) does not state that the patient was examined by sonography machine by accused No.1. Moreover, Dr.Vijaybhai Jivrajbhai Kanani, who has been examined vide Exh.35, also does not state that when he had reached the clinic on 11.02.2008, the accused No.1 was conducting sonography test on patient - Kavuben Ashokbhai Solanki, but only states that the said sonography machine was on, but does not state that any examination on the patient - Kavuben ashokbhai Solanki by the said sonography machine was done.
7.7 Moreover, if the checklist document Form No. 'F' & 'G', which are produced vide Exh.28 and 29, are taken into consideration, it has come on record that accused No.2 Page 17 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined was submitting forms regularly. The prosecution has failed to produce the said 'F' & 'G' Forms and therefore, the learned Sessions Court has rightly not taken into consideration the alleged offence with regard to the same.
7.8 Moreover, though five witnesses have signed the panchanama, but the fact remains that at the time when the raid was conducted, none of the panchas had seen accused No.1, treating any patient through the said sonography machine.
7.9 Moreover, if the evidence of Jasubhai Ramabhai Patel, who has been examined vide Exh.30, is taken into consideration, he has deposed that he has not stated that he had seen the accused using the said machine for treating any of the patients.
7.10 The learned Sessions Court has rightly dealt with the evidence and in view of the fact that the search was entirely illegal; and that the complainant has not been able to prove that he had the authority to conduct the procedure of search and seizure, the learned Sessions Court has rightly acquitted the accused of the offences as alleged.
8. Further, learned advocate for the appellant -
Page 18 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined Authority is not in a position to show any evidence to take a contrary view in the matter or that the approach of the Court below is vitiated by some manifest illegality or that the decision is perverse or that the Court below has ignored the material evidence on record. In above view of the matter, I am of the considered opinion that the Court below was completely justified in passing impugned judgment and order.
9. Considering the impugned judgment, the trial Court has recorded that there was no direct evidence connecting the accused with the incident and there are contradictions in the depositions of the prosecution witnesses.
In absence of the direct evidence, it cannot be proved that the accused are involved in the offence. Further, the motive of the accused behind the incident is not established. The trial Court has rightly considered all the evidence on record and passed the impugned judgment. The trial Court has rightly evaluated the facts and the evidence on record.
10. It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal, the appellate court is not required to re-write the judgment or to give fresh reasoning, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper.
Such principle is down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka Vs. Hemareddy, reported in AIR 1981 SC Page 19 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined 1417 wherein it is held as under:
"... This court has observed in Girija Nandini Devi V. Bigendra Nandini Chaudhary (1967)1 SCR 93: (AIR 1967 SC 1124) that it is not the duty of the appellate court when it agrees with the view of the trial court on the evidence to repeat the narration of the evidence or to reiterate the reasons given by the trial court expression of general agreement with the reasons given by the Court the decision of which is under appeal, will ordinarily suffice."
11. Thus, in case the appellate court agrees with the reasons and the opinion given by the lower court, then the discussion of evidence at length is not necessary.
12. 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 Page 20 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined 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."
13. 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 Page 21 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined with the judgment of acquittal, unless reasoning by the 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 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.
14. In the case of Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, reported in (2007) 4 SCC 415, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under:
"42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:
(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
(2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach Page 22 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law.
(3) Various expressions, such as, "substantial and compelling reasons", "good and sufficient grounds", "very strong circumstances", "distorted conclusions", "glaring mistakes", etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of "flourishes of language" to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion.
(4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law.
Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and Page 23 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined strengthened by the trial court.
(5) If two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court."
15. 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, 1973 no case is made out to interfere with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal.
16. In view of above facts and circumstances of the case, on my careful re-appreciation of the entire evidence, I found that there is no infirmity or irregularity in the findings of fact recorded by learned trial Court and under the circumstances, the learned trial Court has rightly acquitted the respondent/s - accused for the elaborate reasons stated in the impugned judgment and I also endorse the view/finding of the learned trial Court leading to the acquittal.
17. In view of the above and for the reasons stated above, the present Criminal Appeal fails and the same Page 24 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026 NEUTRAL CITATION R/CR.A/1528/2018 CAV JUDGMENT DATED: 25/03/2026 undefined deserves to be dismissed and is dismissed, accordingly. Record & Proceedings be remitted to the concerned trial Court forthwith.
(SANJEEV J.THAKER,J) SRILATHA Page 25 of 25 Uploaded by U. SRILATHA(HC00185) on Wed Mar 25 2026 Downloaded on : Thu Mar 26 01:02:22 IST 2026