https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298618 Interference with an acquittal is permissible where the trial court's appreciation of evidence is manifestly erroneous or perverse; on the eye-witness and medical evidence, the High Court was justified in reversing the acquittal because the stabbing blow was proved. On the substantive offence, however, the absence of prior animosity and the altercation-driven nature of the showed no intention to cause death or knowledge that death was the inevitable result. The conviction under Section 302 IPC was therefore altered to Section 304 Part II IPC, while the conviction under Section 324 IPC was maintained and the sentence confined to the period already undergone. en-us Thu, 18 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Apr 2022 12:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298618 Interference with an acquittal is permissible where the trial court's appreciation of evidence is manifestly erroneous or perverse; on the eye-witness and medical evidence, the High Court was justified in reversing the acquittal because the stabbing blow was proved. On the substantive offence, however, the absence of prior animosity and the altercation-driven nature of the showed no intention to cause death or knowledge that death was the inevitable result. The conviction under Section 302 IPC was therefore altered to Section 304 Part II IPC, while the conviction under Section 324 IPC was maintained and the sentence confined to the period already undergone. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 18 Mar 1999 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298618