2008 (9) TMI 1032 - SC - Indian Laws

Supreme Court Upholds Acquittal, Stresses on Need for Substantial Reasons

The Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court's judgment acquitting the respondent of the offence under Section 396 IPC. Despite finding ... - Issues Involved:1. Acquittal of the respondent by the High Court for the offence under Section 396 IPC.2. Parameters for dealing with an appeal against judgment of acquittal.3. Legal position on the powers of the appellate court in appeals against acquittal.Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:1. Acquittal of the Respondent by the High Court for the Offence Under Section 396 IPC:The appeal challenged the judgment of the Allahabad High Court, which set aside the conviction of the respondent for the offence under Section 396 IPC, initially recorded by the Vth Additional Sessions Judge, Fatehpur. The respondent was sentenced to life imprisonment but was acquitted of the charge under Section 314 IPC. The background of the case involved a dacoity on 9.5.1973, where about 16-17 dacoits committed the crime, resulting in the death of Hiralal and injuries to others. The High Court noted that the trial court overlooked the enmity between the accused and the complainant (PW-2), and the delay in naming the accused in the FIR raised doubts about the prosecution's case. The High Court acquitted the respondent, citing inconsistencies in witness testimonies and the lack of immediate identification of the accused.2. Parameters for Dealing with an Appeal Against Judgment of Acquittal:The Supreme Court outlined the parameters for dealing with an appeal against a judgment of acquittal. It emphasized that the High Court has full power to reappreciate, review, and reconsider the evidence and reach its own conclusions. However, there is a double presumption in favor of the accused: the presumption of innocence and the reinforcement of this presumption by the trial court's acquittal. The Court referred to several precedents, including Sheo Swarup v. R. Emperor, which established that the appellate court should give proper weight to the trial judge's views on witness credibility, the presumption of innocence, and the right of the accused to benefit from any doubt.3. Legal Position on the Powers of the Appellate Court in Appeals Against Acquittal:The Supreme Court reiterated that the appellate court has extensive powers to review the evidence and reach its own conclusions. However, it should not interfere with an acquittal unless there are substantial and compelling reasons. The Court cited various judgments, including Prandas v. State and Sanwat Singh v. State of Rajasthan, which clarified that the appellate court can reverse an acquittal if the trial court's judgment is based on conjectures and hypothesis rather than legal evidence. The Court also highlighted the balance between individual liberty and the need to prevent the acquittal of guilty persons, emphasizing that the appellate court must ensure that justice is served.Conclusion:In the present case, the Supreme Court found that although some of the High Court's reasoning was not legally supportable, the ultimate conclusion of acquittal was a possible view. Therefore, the Supreme Court declined to interfere with the High Court's judgment and dismissed the appeal, discharging the bail bond executed by the respondent.