Perversity and inadequate reasons in criminal acquittal led to remand for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

A criminal judgment must set out the points for determination, the decision on each point, and the reasons supporting that decision; where material evidence is ignored, irrelevant material is considered, or the conclusion is irrational, the finding becomes perverse. On the record, the trial court dealt with a serious criminal case perfunctorily and without proper appreciation of the evidence, while the High Court affirmed the acquittal without independently examining the evidence or medical material. The absence of adequate reasons was treated as a patent illegality that prevented effective appellate scrutiny, and the acquittal and revisional orders were found unsustainable. The matter was remanded for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

---

---

Issues: Whether the acquittal and revisional orders were vitiated for perversity and lack of reasons, warranting remand for fresh decision.

Analysis: The record showed that the trial court disposed of a serious criminal case in a perfunctory manner without proper appreciation of the evidence, without adequate reasoning, and without compliance with the requirement that a criminal judgment disclose the points for determination, the decision thereon, and the reasons for the decision. The High Court also affirmed the acquittal without independently examining the evidence or the medical material. An order or finding becomes infirm when relevant evidence is ignored, irrelevant material is considered, or the conclusion is irrational, perverse, or based on no proper evaluation of the record. The absence of sound reasons was treated as a patent illegality and the appellate court was unable to test the correctness of the findings on the existing record.

Conclusion: The acquittal and revisional orders were held to be perverse and unsustainable, and the matter was remanded to the trial court for fresh disposal in accordance with law.

---