https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295276 In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court may reappreciate evidence, but interference is justified only where the trial court's view is perverse, palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous, demonstrably unsustainable, or wholly unreasonable. If the trial court has adopted a reasonable and plausible view, acquittal should not be disturbed merely because another view is possible. The presumption of innocence stands strengthened after acquittal, and where two reasonable views arise on the same evidence, the view favourable to the accused must prevail. The High Court interfered without finding perversity and acted only on the possibility of conviction, so the acquittal was to be restored. en-us Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 May 2021 08:33:46 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295276 In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court may reappreciate evidence, but interference is justified only where the trial court's view is perverse, palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous, demonstrably unsustainable, or wholly unreasonable. If the trial court has adopted a reasonable and plausible view, acquittal should not be disturbed merely because another view is possible. The presumption of innocence stands strengthened after acquittal, and where two reasonable views arise on the same evidence, the view favourable to the accused must prevail. The High Court interfered without finding perversity and acted only on the possibility of conviction, so the acquittal was to be restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295276