Perverse acquittal review: appellate courts may reverse when the evidence is wrongly rejected on untenable grounds.

In an appeal against acquittal, an appellate court may reappraise the evidence fully, but it must give due regard to the trial court's view and interfere only when the acquittal is perverse or based on untenable reasons. Applying that standard, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court's reversal of acquittal because the trial court had rejected material prosecution evidence on flimsy grounds, while the High Court had properly assessed the eye-witness account, medical evidence, prompt reporting and surrounding circumstances. Minor discrepancies and speculative attacks on timing or fabrication were held insufficient to discredit the prosecution case, and the convictions and sentences were left undisturbed.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in reversing the acquittal and convicting the accused on the basis of the evidence on record.

Analysis: The appellate court's power in an appeal against acquittal is as wide as in an appeal against conviction, but it must give due regard to the trial court's view and interfere only after careful reappraisal of the evidence and reasons for taking a contrary view. The finding of acquittal was held to be perverse because the trial court had rejected material parts of the prosecution case on flimsy or untenable grounds, while the High Court had examined the evidence, including the eye-witness account, medical evidence, prompt reporting, and surrounding circumstances, and had rightly discarded those criticisms. Minor discrepancies and speculative suggestions as to timing or fabrication were treated as insufficient to discredit the prosecution case.

Conclusion: The reversal of acquittal and the convictions recorded by the High Court were upheld.

Final Conclusion: The appeal failed, and the convictions and sentences imposed by the High Court remained undisturbed.

Ratio Decidendi: In an appeal against acquittal, interference is warranted where the acquittal is perverse or based on untenable reasons, and a reasoned reappraisal of the evidence by the appellate court justifies a contrary conclusion.

---