BALU HANMANT MOHITE Vs. DURGAPPA YELAPPA POWER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) HEARD the counsel appearing for the petitioner at length. Shri Joshi submitted that the learned trial Judge committed the error in discarding the prosecution evidence and holding that the prosecution did not prove the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt. He submitted that the trial Judge did not give proper importance to the medical evidence which establishes that the deceased had sustained the injuries which were likely to be caused by instruments like knives. He submitted further that the learned trial Judge did not appreciate the evidence as a whole and, therefore, landed in error of coming to the conclusion that the accused were not guilty. He prayed for setting aside the said order of acquittal and prayed that the said accused be convicted.

(2.) SHRI Shringarpure, Additional Public Prosecutor, justified the order under challenge as correct, proper and legal by pointing out the variance in the evidence of PW-3, the panchnama and the F. I. R. He submitted that the judgment and order which is put to challenge is well reasoned and is in accordance with the evidence on record. He submitted that the revision be dismissed.

(3.) AS it has been held by the Supreme Court in the matter of Shivaji Genu Mohite v. State of Maharashtra reported in AIR 1973 SC 55 while dealing with the appeal against acquittal the High Court has to be slow. The Supreme Court held that the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused at the time of trial does not get weakened at later stage of appeal.