9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (2) TMI 1386X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ased on no material or it is perverse or the view by the trial court is wholly unreasonable or it is not a plausible view or there is non-consideration of any evidence or there is palpable misreading of evidence, etc. - It is not the stand of the High Court that there had been some miscarriage of justice in the way the trial court has appreciated the evidence. On the contrary, it is the only stand of the High Court that on the available evidence, another view is also reasonably possible in the sense that the Appellant-accused could have been convicted. In such circumstances, the High Court was not justified in reversing the acquittal. The High Court itself having acquitted the Appellant under Section 187 of the MV Act on the ground of no evidence, whether it was possible, to hold him guilty under Sections 279 and 304A of Indian Penal Code, is itself a seriously doubtful question. However, it is not necessary to pronounce on that issue since the Appellant is liable to succeed otherwise. Appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Criminal Appeal No. 512 of 2014 (Arising out of S.L.P. (Criminal) No. 3439/2012) - - - Dated:- 27-2-2014 - S.J. Mukhopadhaya and Kurian Jos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... peal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as 'Code of Criminal Procedure'). The High Court re-appreciated the whole evidence and came to the conclusion that the Appellant was liable to be convicted under Sections 279 and 304A of Indian Penal Code. Further, it was held that the prosecution has failed to prove the offences under Section 187 and 197 of the MV Act . Accordingly, the appeal was allowed and the Appellant was sentenced to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months with fine of ₹ 2,000/- under Section 304A and for three months with fine of ₹ 500/- under Section 279 of Indian Penal Code. A default sentence was also given. The sentences were to run concurrently. Thus aggrieved, the Appellant is before this Court. 5. Section 197 of the MV Act deals with unauthorized driving of a motor vehicle. Section 187 of the MV Act reads as follows: 187. Punishment for offences relating to accident.- Whoever fails to comply with the provisions of Clause (c) of Sub-section (1) of Section 132 or of Section 133 or Section 134 shall be punishable with imprisonment for a term which may extend to three months, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) 6. In the instant case, the main defence of the Appellant before the trial court was that there was no evidence to hold that he was the driver of the tractor at the relevant time. According to the prosecution, there is no direct evidence. Even the injured witness PW-5, who was driving the scooty, has not identified the driver. The High Court, on the only evidence that the Appellant was scolded by people in the hospital, has come to the conclusion that the Appellant was the driver of the tractor. There is also no direct evidence with regard to the ingredients of Sections 279 and 304A of Indian Penal Code. The High Court, on re-appreciation of the evidence, has taken another view so as to convict the accused. 7. There is no finding in the impugned judgment by the High Court that the conclusions drawn by the trial court are perverse so as to mean that the same is against the weight of evidence. The important issue, thus, for our consideration is-whether the High Court was justified in re-appreciating the evidence and reversing the order of acquittal merely because of a possibility of another view. 8. The High Court in an appeal under Section 378 of Code of Criminal Procedur ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... To quote: 8. While deciding an appeal against acquittal, the power of the appellate court is no less than the power exercised while hearing appeals against conviction. In both types of appeals, the power exists to review the entire evidence. However, one significant difference is that an order of acquittal will not be interfered with, by an appellate court, where the judgment of the trial court is based on evidence and the view taken is reasonable and plausible. It will not reverse the decision of the trial court merely because a different view is possible. The appellate court will also bear in mind that there is a presumption of innocence in favour of the accused and the accused is entitled to get the benefit of any doubt. Further, if it decides to interfere, it should assign reasons for differing with the decision of the trial court. (Emphasis supplied) 12. In Ramesh Babulal Doshi v. State of Gujarat (1996) 9 SCC 225, this Court has taken the view that while considering the appeal against acquittal, the appellate court is first required to seek an answer to the question whether the findings of the trial court are palpably wrong, manifestly erroneous or demonstrably unsu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed; but there is failure of justice if the guilty is let scot-free. As cautioned by this Court in State of Punjab v. Karnail Singh (2003) 11 SCC 271: 6. There is no embargo on the appellate court reviewing the evidence upon which an order of acquittal is based. Generally, the order of acquittal shall not be interfered with because the presumption of innocence of the accused is further strengthened by acquittal. The golden thread which runs through the web of administration of justice in criminal cases is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused should be adopted. The paramount consideration of the court is to ensure that miscarriage of justice is prevented. A miscarriage of justice which may arise from acquittal of the guilty is no less than from the conviction of an innocent. In a case where admissible evidence is ignored, a duty is cast upon the appellate court to reappreciate the evidence even where the accused has been acquitted, for the purpose of ascertaining as to whether any of the accused committed any offence or not... (Emph ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
