https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309789 Appellate interference with acquittal is justified where the prosecution evidence is trustworthy and the acquittal rests on conjectures, immaterial omissions, or misappreciation of evidence. The SC noted that the eye-witness and injured witness testimony was broadly consistent with the FIR and medical evidence, so the High Court's rejection of that material was untenable. It also reiterated that a person who acts as the aggressor and initiates the attack cannot invoke the right of private defence to justify a deliberate killing. The Court further stated that conviction of the accused alone was legally permissible even though the co-accused had been acquitted. en-us Thu, 02 Jun 1983 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Sep 2023 16:23:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309789 Appellate interference with acquittal is justified where the prosecution evidence is trustworthy and the acquittal rests on conjectures, immaterial omissions, or misappreciation of evidence. The SC noted that the eye-witness and injured witness testimony was broadly consistent with the FIR and medical evidence, so the High Court's rejection of that material was untenable. It also reiterated that a person who acts as the aggressor and initiates the attack cannot invoke the right of private defence to justify a deliberate killing. The Court further stated that conviction of the accused alone was legally permissible even though the co-accused had been acquitted. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 02 Jun 1983 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=309789