Skip to content


Mochi Chaturbhai Kalidas Vs. State of Gujarat - Court Judgment

LegalCrystal Citation
SubjectCriminal
CourtSupreme Court of India
Decided On
Case NumberCriminal Appeal No. 452 of 1974
Judge
Reported in(1982)2SCC148
ActsIndian Penal Code (IPC), (IPC) 1860 - Sections 302, 364
AppellantMochi Chaturbhai Kalidas
RespondentState of Gujarat
DispositionAppeal Dismissed
Excerpt:
.....appreciation of evidence — trial court rejecting the prosecution case on general grounds, like witnesses were interested and belonged to a particular caste, without considering intrinsic merits of the evidence — high court effectively displacing all the important reasons given by the trial court in support of acquittal and relying upon various circumstances which conclusively proved the prosecution case, reversing the order of acquittal -- 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. 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..........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.....
Judgment:

S. MURTAZA FAZAL ALI, J.

1. 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 year 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.


Save Judgments// Add Notes // Store Search Result sets // Organizer Client Files //