Judgment Intelligence
Conviction Set Aside- Court
- Supreme Court of India
- Date of Decision
- 12 February 2024
- Bench
- Justices Bela M. Trivedi and Satish Chandra Sharma
- Relevant Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 — Sections 34, 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 504; Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — Section 235
The High Court's judgment was set aside, the Trial Court's acquittal restored and the appellants acquitted of all charges, with a direction to release them forthwith if in custody (para 39); the appeal was disposed of with no order as to costs (paras 40-41).
Key holdings
- The High Court's power to re-appreciate evidence in an appeal against acquittal is qualified; an acquittal is not to be reversed on a mere difference of opinion (para 25).
- Where two equally plausible views arise from the evidence, the view in favour of the accused should ordinarily be followed (paras 26, 36).
- Partial or selective appreciation of evidence may result in a miscarriage of justice and is itself a ground of challenge (paras 35-36).
- An appellate court reversing an acquittal must address all the reasons given by the Trial Court and demonstrate an illegality, perversity or error of law or fact (para 36).
- If direct evidence is not credible, the case falls back on circumstantial evidence, which must exclude every hypothesis except guilt (paras 37-38).
Case explainer by NyayVidhan: an account of this judgment and the law it laid down, not the court's text. The judgment itself is the authoritative version.
Brief Facts
Court's Findings
Legal Principle
Precedents Relied Upon
- Selvaraj v. State of Karnataka (2015) 10 SCC 230
Where the trial court's view on appraisal of the evidence was a possible one, the High Court should not have interfered with the acquittal.
- Sanjeev v. State of H.P. (2022) 6 SCC 294
Summarised the approach in an appeal against acquittal: the trial court's reasons must be dealt with, an acquittal reinforces the presumption of innocence, and where two views are possible the appellate court must be extremely slow to interfere.
- Sanwat Singh v. State of Rajasthan AIR 1961 SC 715
An appellate court has full power to review the evidence in an appeal against acquittal, but must consider every matter on record and the reasons of the court below and express its reasons for holding the acquittal unjustified.
View all precedents (4)
- Sharad Birdhichand Sarda v. State of Maharashtra (1984) 4 SCC 116
The five principles (‘Panchsheel’) of proof by circumstantial evidence; the accused must be and not merely may be guilty.
