https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281702 Interference with a High Court acquittal under Article 136 is justified only if the appreciation of evidence is shown to suffer from a glaring infirmity or perversity. Where the conviction depended mainly on a single eyewitness, the High Court found that testimony unreliable because of the absence of proved motive, inconsistencies between the FIR and in-court evidence, and circumstances indicating possible false implication of several accused. On that record, the Supreme Court held that a mere possibility of another view was insufficient to disturb the acquittal, and no interference was warranted. en-us Tue, 13 Aug 1974 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Jul 2019 14:56:02 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281702 Interference with a High Court acquittal under Article 136 is justified only if the appreciation of evidence is shown to suffer from a glaring infirmity or perversity. Where the conviction depended mainly on a single eyewitness, the High Court found that testimony unreliable because of the absence of proved motive, inconsistencies between the FIR and in-court evidence, and circumstances indicating possible false implication of several accused. On that record, the Supreme Court held that a mere possibility of another view was insufficient to disturb the acquittal, and no interference was warranted. Case-Laws Income Tax Tue, 13 Aug 1974 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281702