https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298656 In an appeal against acquittal, interference is justified where the trial court's view is perverse, unsustainable, or based on ignoring material evidence; the appellate court may still reappreciate evidence and reach its own conclusion where guilt is proved. On the facts, medical evidence established that the victim had low IQ and mild mental retardation and could not understand the nature and consequences of the act, making consent legally ineffective. The accused was also shown to be the biological father of the child born to the victim, and the defence was a total denial. The SC therefore upheld the conviction and found no reason to interfere with the sentence, which was already the minimum prescribed. en-us Thu, 03 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Nov 2021 20:27:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298656 In an appeal against acquittal, interference is justified where the trial court's view is perverse, unsustainable, or based on ignoring material evidence; the appellate court may still reappreciate evidence and reach its own conclusion where guilt is proved. On the facts, medical evidence established that the victim had low IQ and mild mental retardation and could not understand the nature and consequences of the act, making consent legally ineffective. The accused was also shown to be the biological father of the child born to the victim, and the defence was a total denial. The SC therefore upheld the conviction and found no reason to interfere with the sentence, which was already the minimum prescribed. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 03 Dec 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298656