2009 (4) TMI 559 - SC - Indian Laws

Prosecution - Acquittal - Evidence - Proof beyond reasonable doubt - Words and Phrases - Reasonable doubt - Appellate Court - Powers of Appellate Court

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Acquittal under the Prevention of Corruption Act.
2. Presumption under Section 20 of the Act.
3. Evaluation of evidence and witness credibility.
4. Scope and power of appellate courts in appeals against acquittal.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Acquittal under the Prevention of Corruption Act:
The respondent was acquitted by the Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act) for alleged offenses under Sections 7, 13(1)(d) read with Section 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988. The trial court found that the accusations were not established. The High Court upheld this acquittal, leading to the State of Rajasthan's appeal to the Supreme Court.

2. Presumption under Section 20 of the Act:
The State contended that the presumption under Section 20 of the Act was not considered. The trial court acquitted the respondent on the grounds that the prosecution's version lacked credibility. The money was recovered from the respondent's almirah, but there was no evidence showing how the currency notes smeared with powder reached there. The prosecution's case was that the accused asked the person concerned to put the money in the almirah instead of accepting it directly.

3. Evaluation of Evidence and Witness Credibility:
The trial court noted significant issues with the prosecution's evidence:
- One complainant was not examined, and the other did not support the prosecution's version.
- The independent witness also did not support the prosecution.
- PW-11, the Superintendent of Police, testified about the complaint but none of the Motbir witnesses corroborated his statement.
- Witnesses Narpat Singh (PW-6), Chunni Lal (PW-7), and Lal Singh (PW-9) did not confirm the search of the sitting room or recovery of currency notes from the almirah.
- The prosecution's accepted case was that the money was recovered from an open almirah, but no evidence showed how the powder-smeared notes got there.

4. Scope and Power of Appellate Courts in Appeals Against Acquittal:
The Supreme Court reviewed the legal principles governing appeals against acquittal:
- Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Allows the State to appeal against an acquittal. The appellate court has full power to re-appreciate, review, and reconsider the evidence.
- Double Presumption of Innocence: In acquittal cases, there is a double presumption in favor of the accused - the presumption of innocence and the reinforcement of this presumption by the trial court's acquittal.
- Historical Precedents: The judgment referenced several landmark cases, including Sheo Swarup v. R. Emperor (1934), Prandas v. State (1954), and Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra (1973), which established that appellate courts have full power to review evidence but should exercise caution and give due weight to the trial court's findings.
- Principles for Appellate Review: The appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the trial court's judgment is manifestly erroneous or demonstrably unsustainable. The appellate court must consider the credibility of witnesses, the presumption of innocence, and the right of the accused to benefit from any doubt.

In conclusion, the Supreme Court found no reason to interfere with the acquittal, as the views of the trial court and the High Court were reasonable and possible. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the respondent's acquittal.