Court Cites Insufficient Evidence and Upholds Double Presumption of Innocence for Respondent Prabhakar
In a significant judgment delivered on September 23, 2026, the Gujarat High Court upheld the acquittal of Prabhakar, a respondent in a high-profile lion poaching case. The appeal, filed by the State of Gujarat, contested the acquittal granted by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhavnagar, in Criminal Appeal No. 24 of 2009. The case was presided over by Justice Hemant M. Prachchhak, who reaffirmed the principles of double presumption of innocence and the necessity for credible evidence to sustain a conviction.
The case revolved around allegations of illegal poaching and trafficking of protected Indian Lions, a species listed under Schedule I of the Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972. Prabhakar was initially implicated based on a chit containing his phone numbers found with a co-accused. However, the High Court highlighted the lack of direct or convincing circumstantial evidence connecting him to the crime.
The court scrutinized the reliance on a lie-detection test report by the prosecution, noting that the Scientific Officer who conducted the test was not examined, rendering the report inadmissible. Moreover, the manner of recovery of the chit was not satisfactorily demonstrated by the panch witness, leading to further doubts about the evidence's reliability.
Justice Prachchhak underscored the appellate court's role in reviewing evidence, emphasizing that two reasonable conclusions could be drawn from the existing evidence, and thus, the acquittal should not be disturbed. He reiterated that mere suspicion or conjecture cannot replace the requisite proof beyond reasonable doubt.
The State's appeal, driven by Ms. Jirga Jhaveri, Additional Public Prosecutor, argued for reconsideration of evidence that allegedly supported the prosecution's case. However, the defense, represented by Mr. Harshad O Joshi, maintained that the appellate court's judgment was sound and that the prosecution failed to meet the burden of proof.
The High Court's decision reinforces the judiciary's commitment to upholding fair trial standards and the presumption of innocence, especially in cases reliant on circumstantial evidence. The judgment also serves as a caution against the reliance on insufficient or improperly substantiated forensic evidence in criminal trials.
Bottom Line :
Appeal against acquittal - Wildlife poaching case - Respondent was implicated only on basis of chit containing his phone numbers and lie-detection report - Scientific Officer conducting lie-detection test not examined and recovery evidence not satisfactorily proved - Mere suspicion, conjectures and weak circumstantial evidence cannot sustain conviction - In appeal against acquittal, double presumption of innocence operates and unless findings are perverse or manifestly illegal, acquittal should not be interfered with.
Statutory provision(s):
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 378
- Indian Penal Code, 1860, Sections 429, 120B
- Wildlife (Protection) Act, 1972, Sections 9, 11, 39, 40, 43, 49, 51, 52
State of Gujarat v. Prabhakar, (Gujarat) : Law Finder Doc id # 2989279
