Presumption Of Innocence In Favour Of Accused Strengthened Upon Acquittal; 'Special Reasons' Must For Interference In Appeal: Gujarat HC

Background

It was the Appellant authority's case that one Daud Jusub was actively smuggling foreign mark gold on large scale and the same was to be handed over to the Respondent (accused) Nazir Kara. Accordingly, the police apprehended the accuse and a complaint was filed under Section 135 of the Customs Act and 120B of the IPC. The Trial Court, after examining the statements and the evidence, concluded that the accused persons were not guilty of the offence and were, therefore, acquitted.

The Appellant-complainant herein averred that the prosecution had proved beyond reasonable doubt that the accused were guilty. Further, the Magistrate had acquitted the accused basis some minor contradictions and omissions in the evidence.

Per contra, the Respondent-accused contended that there was no admissible evidence on record connecting the accused with the commission of the offence. The accused from whom gold was found had died and the offence of abetment could not be proven against other Respondents.

There was no evidence that the accused Daud Jusub from whom gold was recovered was going to hand over the gold to Nazir. Additionally, a witness had admitted that the foreign mark which was put on the gold could be put by anybody and therefore, it could not be proven conclusively that it was smuggled gold.

Judgement

Justice Sareen primarily observed that in Acquittal Appeals, there is prejudice in favour of the accused and the presumption of innocence is available to him under the Fundamental Principle of Criminal Jurisprudence. The principle 'innocent until proven guilty' is affirmed and strengthened by the Trial Court.

Per the facts and evidence of the case, there was no evidence that the accused Daud was going to hand over the gold to Nazir. No original report of the Mint House regarding the purity of the gold was also placed on record. The Prosecution Witness had admitted that the foreign mark could be put on the gold by anybody.

The Bench then ventured into the proposition that the Appellate Court should not ordinarily interfere with the acquittal order passed by the Trial Court. This was affirmed in State of Rajasthan versus Ram Niwas (2010) 15 SCC 463 where it was held:

"The consequences of the conviction of an innocent person are far more serious and its reverberations cannot but be felt in a civilised society…Careful scrutiny of all these judgments lead to the definite conclusion that the appellate court should be very slow in setting aside a judgment of acquittal particularly in a case where two views are possible."

Accordingly, the criminal appeal was dismissed.

Case Title: H.K.THAKUR Versus NAZIR NOORMOHMED KARA & 2 other(s)

Case No.: R/CR.A/2502/2005

Citation: 2022 LiveLaw (Guj) 40