LAWS(GJH)-2022-5-506

STATE OF GUJARAT Vs. BABUBHAI

Decided On May 04, 2022
STATE OF GUJARAT Appellant
V/S
Babubhai Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Appeal is filed by the appellant - State of Gujarat under Sec. 378 (1) (3) of the Criminal Procedure Code , 1973 against the judgment and order dtd. 7/1/2008 passed by the learned Additional City Sessions Judge, Court No.11, Ahmedabad in Sessions Case No.40 of 2006 dated 17/7/12007 acquitting the respondents - original accused Nos.1 to 5 from the offence punishable under Sec. 366 , 406 and 201 of Indian Penal Code.

(2.) The factual matrix as narrated by the prosecution case stands as under:

(3.) Mr.R.C. Kodekar, learned APP for the appellant State learned APP Mr.R.C. Kodekar for the appellant State has vehemently argued that the Sessions Judge has committed a grave error in not believing the deposition of the witnesses examined by the prosecution and evidence adduced by the prosecution. He has further submitted that the Sessions Judge has erred in acquitting the respondents - accused from the charges levelled against them. He has further argued that the prosecution has proved that the respondents have committed offence under Sec. 366 , 406 and 201 of Indian Penal Code. He has further argued that Sessions Judge has acquitted the respondents accused merely on some minor contradictions and omissions in the evidence of the witnesses. He has further argued that the Sessions Judge has erred in not believing the evidence of the investigating officer who had no reason to implicate the accused falsely in the case. He has further argued that the offence punishable under Sec. 366 , 406 and 201 of the Indian Penal Code is made out, however, the same is not believed by the Sessions Judge. He has further argued that though the prosecution witness has supported the case of the prosecution, the Sessions Judge erroneously not believed their evidence and acquitted the accused. He has further argued that the Sessions has erroneously held that the prosecution has failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. Making above submissions, he has requested to allow the present appeal.