https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314452 An appellate court may reappreciate evidence in an appeal against acquittal, but interference is justified only where the trial court's view is illegal, perverse, or manifestly erroneous; if two views are reasonably possible, the one favouring the accused must prevail. Applying that standard, the SC found the High Court was not justified in reversing the acquittal because it effectively substituted a different view without meeting the strict threshold for interference. It also held that the eyewitness and injured witness evidence, read with the medical record, was not reliable enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction was set aside and the trial court's acquittal restored. en-us Mon, 12 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 29 Mar 2025 11:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314452 An appellate court may reappreciate evidence in an appeal against acquittal, but interference is justified only where the trial court's view is illegal, perverse, or manifestly erroneous; if two views are reasonably possible, the one favouring the accused must prevail. Applying that standard, the SC found the High Court was not justified in reversing the acquittal because it effectively substituted a different view without meeting the strict threshold for interference. It also held that the eyewitness and injured witness evidence, read with the medical record, was not reliable enough to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The conviction was set aside and the trial court's acquittal restored. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 12 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=314452