https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279559 The High Court's revisional jurisdiction against an acquittal at the instance of a private complainant is narrow and exceptional: it may be exercised only to correct a glaring procedural defect, manifest legal error, or other serious infirmity causing grave miscarriage of justice. It cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, nor can it justify reappraisal of oral evidence or a retrial merely to overturn factual findings. Applying that principle, the High Court exceeded the proper limits of revision by reweighing the evidence and directing retrial, so the revisional order was unsustainable and the acquittal restored by the trial court stood revived. en-us Tue, 01 May 1973 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Mar 2019 14:40:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279559 The High Court's revisional jurisdiction against an acquittal at the instance of a private complainant is narrow and exceptional: it may be exercised only to correct a glaring procedural defect, manifest legal error, or other serious infirmity causing grave miscarriage of justice. It cannot be used as a substitute for appeal, nor can it justify reappraisal of oral evidence or a retrial merely to overturn factual findings. Applying that principle, the High Court exceeded the proper limits of revision by reweighing the evidence and directing retrial, so the revisional order was unsustainable and the acquittal restored by the trial court stood revived. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 01 May 1973 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=279559