https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295879 An appellate court should not disturb a reasoned acquittal unless the prosecution evidence is free from material infirmities and the trial court's view is perverse. Here, the trial court disbelieved the prosecution on significant contradictions, including medical evidence inconsistent with the alleged time of death, disputed eyewitness presence and identification, unreliable dying declarations, and the interested conduct of witnesses. The High Court reversed the acquittal without adequately addressing these defects or showing why the trial court's findings were wrong. The conviction was therefore unsustainable, and the acquittal was restored in favour of the accused. en-us Tue, 24 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Apr 2022 11:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295879 An appellate court should not disturb a reasoned acquittal unless the prosecution evidence is free from material infirmities and the trial court's view is perverse. Here, the trial court disbelieved the prosecution on significant contradictions, including medical evidence inconsistent with the alleged time of death, disputed eyewitness presence and identification, unreliable dying declarations, and the interested conduct of witnesses. The High Court reversed the acquittal without adequately addressing these defects or showing why the trial court's findings were wrong. The conviction was therefore unsustainable, and the acquittal was restored in favour of the accused. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 24 Jul 1990 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=295879