https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283347 Interference with an acquittal is justified only where the finding is perverse, contrary to evidence, or affected by manifest legal or factual error; on the record, no such infirmity was shown and the acquittal was upheld. The benefit of legal insanity under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code requires proof of legal, not merely medical, insanity; contemporaneous conduct and evidence of epileptic attacks and mental disturbance supported the defence, and that view was accepted. The prosecution also failed to prove that the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, as the post-mortem evidence did not establish that essential element beyond reasonable doubt. en-us Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 31 Oct 2023 12:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283347 Interference with an acquittal is justified only where the finding is perverse, contrary to evidence, or affected by manifest legal or factual error; on the record, no such infirmity was shown and the acquittal was upheld. The benefit of legal insanity under Section 84 of the Indian Penal Code requires proof of legal, not merely medical, insanity; contemporaneous conduct and evidence of epileptic attacks and mental disturbance supported the defence, and that view was accepted. The prosecution also failed to prove that the injuries were sufficient in the ordinary course of nature to cause death, as the post-mortem evidence did not establish that essential element beyond reasonable doubt. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 01 Dec 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=283347