https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469499 In an appeal against acquittal, interference is justified where the trial court ignores material evidence or takes a perverse view; the appellate court may reappreciate the record and restore conviction if the prosecution evidence was misread. In a road-accident prosecution, the accused's identity as driver and the charge of rash and negligent driving can be proved through reliable eye-witness testimony and surrounding circumstances. A test identification parade is not indispensable where the witnesses identify the accused in court and at the spot, and non-service of notice under Section 133 of the Motor Vehicles Act causes no prejudice if the driver is otherwise linked to the vehicle. Minor inconsistencies were treated as immaterial. en-us Thu, 16 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 Jun 2026 18:20:25 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469499 In an appeal against acquittal, interference is justified where the trial court ignores material evidence or takes a perverse view; the appellate court may reappreciate the record and restore conviction if the prosecution evidence was misread. In a road-accident prosecution, the accused's identity as driver and the charge of rash and negligent driving can be proved through reliable eye-witness testimony and surrounding circumstances. A test identification parade is not indispensable where the witnesses identify the accused in court and at the spot, and non-service of notice under Section 133 of the Motor Vehicles Act causes no prejudice if the driver is otherwise linked to the vehicle. Minor inconsistencies were treated as immaterial. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 16 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469499