9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (7) TMI 973X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... that blank cheques were obtained by the respondent as advance payment also becomes probable and the onus of burden would shift on the complainant. The complainant did not produce any books of account or stock register maintained by him in the course of his regular business or any acknowledgement for delivery of goods, to establish that as a matter of fact woolen carpets were sold by him to the appellant on August 6, 1994 for a sum of Rs. 1,90,348.39. Having regard to the materials on record, this Court is of the opinion that the respondent failed to establish his case under Section 138 of the Act as required by law and, therefore, the impugned judgment of the High Court is liable to be set aside. Thus it can be inferred that the presumption under the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act is a rebuttable one and the onus is on the accused to raise a probable defence. He can either show that the consideration and debt did not exist or that under the particular circumstances of the case the non-existence of consideration and debt is so probable that a prudent ought to suppose that no consideration and debt existed. Further, specific defence in this regard may not have to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... late Court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded, it is equally true that there is a double presumption in favour of the innocence of the accused, firstly on account of the presumption of innocence available to an accused and secondly on account of the fact that the competent Court has acquitted the accused and therefore, if two reasonable conclusions were possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the Appellate Court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the Trial Court, merely, because the Appellate Court could have arrived at a different conclusion than that of the Trial Court - However, where the judgment appealed against is totally perverse and the findings have been arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant or inadmissible material, then the Appellate Court would be well within its powers to interfere with the said findings and set them aside. The respondentaccused has been able to rebut the presumption that the cheque was issued in the discharge of a legally enforceable debt and the view taken by the Trial Court while acq ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... filing of the present complaint. 3. In preliminary evidence, the complainant examined himself as CW1 and thereafter the complainant closed his preliminary evidence. Finding sufficient ground against the accused, he was summoned to face trial for offence under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act. 4. Finding a prima facie case for the offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, the accused was served with a notice of accusation according to which he pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. 5. In his evidence, the complainant examined Sayad Rashid, Assistant Manager, Canara Bank, Branch, Sri Muktsar Sahib as CW1, Sagar Midda,Assistant Manager, HDFC, NGM, Branch Sri Muktsar Sahib as CW2, Hemant Sharma, Tax Assistant, Income Tax Office, Sri Muktsar Sahib as CW3, himself as CW4 and thereafter the complainant closed his evidence. 6. After the closure of the evidence of the complainant all the incriminating evidence was put to the accused, as required under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. The accused denied the allegations while stating that he had financial dealings with the C.C and Company which is owned by Raman Girdhar, who was carrying on the business ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of entry dated 26.05.2017 of Cheque Return Register Ex.C5. 8. The complainant further examined CW2-Sagar Midda, Assistant Manager, HDFC, NGM, Branch Sri Muktsar Sahib, who stepped into the witness-box and brought the summoned record pertaining to the statement of account bearing No. 50100045693849 of Pawan Kumar and placed on record its certified copy Ex.C6. CW2 further testified that he had seen the cheque in question Ex.C1, which was sent to their bank on 26.05.2017 for clearance and collection of the amount but the same was returned back vide memo Ex.C2 there being insufficient amount in the account of accused on the same day . 9. The complainant further examined CW3-Hemant Sharma, Tax Assistant, Income Tax Office, Sri Muktsar Sahib, who while stepping into the witness-box brought the summoned record i.e. Income Tax Return for the financial year 2017-18 assessment year 2018-19 pertaining to Ashok Kumar having PAN No.AVFPK4756P and proved its certified copy as Ex.C7 and further identified the signature of L.D. Bansal, Income Tax Officer at point Mark A. 10. Lastly, the complainant himself stepped into the witness-box as CW4 and tendered into evidence his duly sworn affi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Presumptions as to negotiable instruments. -Until the contrary is proved, the following presumptions shall be made:- (a) of consideration -that every negotiable instrument was made or drawn for consideration, and that every such instrument, when it has been accepted, indorsed, negotiated or transferred, was accepted, indorsed, negotiated or transferred for consideration; Section 139 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, reads as under:- 139. Presumption in favour of holder.- It shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the holder of a cheque received the cheque, of the nature referred to in section 138, for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability. 16. The Hon ble Supreme Court has dealt with the issue of statutory presumptions and rebuttal thereof in a number of judgments some of which have been discussed hereinbelow:- In K.N. Beena Versus Maniyappan, 2001(4) R.C.R (Criminal) 545 , the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under: 6. In our view the impugned Judgment cannot be sustained at all. The Judgment erroneously proceeds on the basis that the burden of proving consideration for a dishonoured cheque is on t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... synonymous with conclusive proof . 31.In terms of Section 4 of the Evidence Act whenever it is provided by the Act that the Court shall presume a fact, it shall regard such fact as proved unless and until it is disproved. The words 'proved' and 'disproved' have been defined in Section 3 of the Evidence Act (the interpretation clause) to mean: - Proved- A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it, the Court either believes it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists. Disproved- A fact is said to be disproved when, after considering the matters before it the Court either believes that it does not exist, or considers its non-existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it does not exist. 32.Applying the said definitions of 'proved' or 'disproved' to principle behind Section 118(a) of the Act, the Court shall presume a negotiable instrument to be for consideration unless and until after consi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... consideration by way of direct evidence. 35. The standard of proof evidently is pre-ponderance of probabilities. Inference of pre-ponderance of probabilities can be drawn not only from the materials on records but also by reference to the circumstances upon which he relies. *** *** *** 42. A presumption is a legal or factual assumption drawn from the existence of certain facts. 43. In P. Ramanatha Aiyar's Advanced Law Lexicon, 3rd edition, at page 3697, the term 'presumption' has been defined as under: A presumption is an inference as to the existence of a fact not actually known arising from its connection with another which is known. A presumption is a conclusion drawn from the proof of facts or circumstances and stands as establishing facts until overcome by contrary proof. A presumption is a probable consequence drawn from facts (either certain, or proved by direct testimony) as to the truth of a fact alleged but of which there is no direct proof. It follows, therefore that a presumption of any fact is an inference of that fact from others that are known . (per ABBOTT, C.J., R. v. Burdett, 4 B. Ald, 161). The word 'Pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pposition that it exists . Therefore, the rebuttal does not have to be conclusively established but such evidence must be adduced before the court in support of the defence that the court must either believe the defence to exist or consider its existence to be reasonably probable, the standard of reasonability being that of the prudent man . 46.The court, however, in the fact situation obtaining therein, was not required to go into the question as to whether an accused can discharge the onus placed on him even from the materials brought on records by the complainant himself. Evidently in law he is entitled to do so. 47. In Goaplast (P) Ltd. v. Chico Ursula D'Souza and Another [(2003) 3 SCC 232], upon which reliance was placed by the learned counsel, this Court held that the presumption arising under Section 139 of the Act can be rebutted by adducing evidence and the burden of proof is on the person who want to rebut the presumption. The question which arose for consideration therein was as to whether closure of accounts or stoppage of payment is sufficient defence to escape from the penal liability under Section 138 of the Act. The answer to the question was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f transfer, (v) as to order of indorsements, (vi) as to appropriate stamp and (vii) as to holder being a holder in due course. Section 139 of the Act provides that it shall be presumed, unless the contrary is proved, that the holder of a cheque received the cheque of the nature referred to in Section 138 for the discharge, in whole or in part, of any debt or other liability. Presumptions are devices by use of which the courts are enabled and entitled to pronounce on an issue notwithstanding that there is no evidence or insufficient evidence. Under the Indian Evidence Act all presumptions must come under one or the other class of the three classes mentioned in the Act, namely, (1) may presume (rebuttable), (2) shall presume (rebuttable) and (3) conclusive presumptions (irrebuttable). The term 'presumption' is used to designate an inference, affirmative or disaffirmative of the existence a fact, conveniently called the presumed fact drawn by a judicial tribunal, by a process of probable reasoning from some matter of fact, either judicially noticed or admitted or established by legal evidence to the satisfaction of the tribunal. Presumption literally means taking as t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unless the contrary is proved in Section 139 of the Act read with definitions of may presume and shall presume as given in Section 4 of the Evidence Act, makes it at once clear that presumptions to be raised under both the provisions are rebuttable. When a presumption is rebuttable, it only points out that the party on whom lies the duty of going forward with evidence, on the fact presumed and when that party has produced evidence fairly and reasonably tending to show that the real fact is not as presumed, the purpose of the presumption is over. The accused in a trial under Section 138 of the Act has two options. He can either show that consideration and debt did not exist or that under the particular circumstances of the case the non-existence of consideration and debt is so probable that a prudent man ought to suppose that no consideration and debt existed. To rebut the statutory presumptions an accused is not expected to prove his defence beyond reasonable doubt as is expected of the complainant in a criminal trial. The accused may adduce direct evidence to prove that the note in question was not supported by consideration and that there was no debt or liability to be disch ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he said liability the appellant had issued two cheques, which were ultimately dishonoured. In support of his case the respondent produced the carbon copy of the bill. A perusal of the bill makes it evident that there is no endorsement made by the respondent accepting the correctness of the contents of the bill. The bill is neither signed by the appellant. On the contrary, the appellant examined one official from the Sales Tax Department, who positively asserted before the Court that the respondent had filed sales tax return for the As- sessment Year 1994-95 indicating that no sale of woolen carpets had taken place during the said Assessment Year and, therefore, sales tax was not paid. The said witness also produced the affidavit sworn by the respondent indicating that during the year 1994-95 there was no sale of woolen carpets by the respondent. Though the complainant was given sufficient opportunity to cross-examine the said witness, nothing could be elicited during his cross-examination so as to create doubt about his assertion that no transaction of sale of woolen carpets was effected by the respondent during the year 1994-95. Once the testimony of the official of the Sales Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bility to negotiable instruments in business transactions. These provisions were intended to discourage people from not honouring their commitments by way of payment through cheques. The court should lean in favour of an interpretation which serves the object of the statute. A post-dated cheque will lose its credibility and acceptability if its payment can be stopped routinely. The purpose of a post-dated cheque is to provide some accommodation to the drawer of the cheque. Therefore, it is all the more necessary that the drawer of the cheque should not be allowed to abuse the accommodation given to him by a creditor by way of acceptance of a post-dated cheque. In view of Section 139, it has to be presumed that a cheque is issued in discharge of any debt or other liability. The presumption can be rebutted by adducing evidence and the burden of proof is on the person who wants to rebut the presumption. This presumption coupled with the object of Chapter XVII of the Act leads to the conclusion that by countermanding payment of a post-dated cheque, a party should not be allowed to get away from the penal provision of Section 138. A contrary view would render Section 138 a dead letter a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in regard to existence of a debt also. The courts below, in our opinion, committed a serious error in proceeding on the basis that for proving the defence the accused is required to step into the witness box and unless he does so he would not be discharging his burden. Such an approach on the part of the courts, we feel, is not correct. 32. An accused for discharging the burden of proof placed upon him under a statute need not examine himself. He may discharge his burden on the basis of the materials already brought on record. An accused has a constitutional right to maintain silence. Standard of proof on the part of the accused and that of the prosecution in a criminal case is different. ... ..... ...... ...... ...... 34. Furthermore, whereas prosecution must prove the guilt of an accused beyond all reasonable doubt, the standard of proof so as to prove a defence on the part of the accused is 'preponderance of probabilities'. Inference of preponderance of probabilities can be drawn not only from the materials brought on record by the parties but also by reference to the circumstances upon which he relies. (emphasis supplied) Specifically in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s on to the accused. Such a presumption is a presumption of law, as distinguished from a presumption of fact which describes provisions by which the court may presume a certain state of affairs. Presumptions are rules of evidence and do not conflict with the presumption of innocence, because by the latter all that is meant is that the prosecution is obliged to prove the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. The obligation on the prosecution may be discharged with the help of presumptions of law or fact unless the accused adduces evidence showing the reasonable probability of the nonexistence of the presumed fact. 23. In other words, provided the facts required to form the basis of a presumption of law exists, the discretion is left with the Court to draw the statutory conclusion, but this does not preclude the person against whom the presumption is drawn from rebutting it and proving the contrary. A fact is said to be proved when, after considering the matters before it, the Court either believes it to exist, or considers its existence so probable that a prudent man ought, under the circumstances of the particular case, to act upon the supposition that it exists. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o rely upon all the evidence led in the case including that of the plaintiff as well. In case, where the defendant fails to discharge the initial onus of proof by showing the non-existence of the consideration, the plaintiff would invariably be held entitled to the benefit of presumption arising under Section 118(a) in his favour. The court may not insist upon the defendant to disprove the existence of consideration by leading direct evidence as the existence of negative evidence is neither possible nor contemplated and even if led, is to be seen with a doubt. The bare denial of the passing of the consideration apparently does not appear to be any defence. Something which is probable has to be brought on record for getting the benefit of shifting the onus of proving to the plaintiff. To disprove the presumption, the defendant has to bring on record such facts and circumstances upon consideration of which the court may either believe that the consideration did not exist or its non-existence was so probable that a prudent man would, under the circumstances of the case, act upon the plea that it did not exist. Interestingly, the very same extract has also been approvingly cited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... igation. However, it must be remembered that the offence made punishable by Section 138 can be better described as a regulatory offence since the bouncing of a cheque is largely in the nature of a civil wrong whose impact is usually confined to the private parties involved in commercial transactions. In such a scenario, the test of proportionality should guide the construction and interpretation of reverse onus clauses and the accused/defendant cannot be expected to discharge an unduly high standard or proof. In the absence of compelling justifications, reverse onus clauses usually impose an evidentiary burden and not a persuasive burden. Keeping this in view, it is a settled position that when an accused has to rebut the presumption under Section 139, the standard of proof for doing so is that of 'preponderance of probabilities'. Therefore, if the accused is able to raise a probable defence which creates doubts about the existence of a legally enforceable debt or liability, the prosecution can fail. As clarified in the citations, the accused can rely on the materials submitted by the complainant in order to raise such a defence and it is conceivable that in some cases the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng on the business of advancing loans to different persons and a chit fund. He had taken a loan from the company in the year 2016-17 and had been making regular payments. At the time of taking of the loan from the said company, the accused had issued 11 blank cheques bearing No.000036 to 000046. The offending cheque bearing No.000043 was a blank cheque lying with Raman Girdhar of C.C. and Company. It was the case of the accused that in fact Raman Girdhar had handed over the said cheque to the complainant-Ashok Kumar, who was an employee of Girdhar Electronics, Railway Road, Sri Muktsar Sahib. Raman Girdhar was a close relation of the owners of Girdhar Electronics and he used Ashok Kumar, an employee of Girdhar Electronics to get the aforementioned cheque dishonoured. As per the accused he had absolutely no dealing with Ashok Kumar. 19. In the present case, firstly, no date of the advancement of the loan has been mentioned in the complaint or in the testimony of the complainant-CW4 only the month and year being April, 2017 is mentioned. In the cross-examination, there is an improvement and the complainant states that the loan was advanced on 09.04.2017. This makes the case of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... estion centres round the approach which the High Court adopts in dealing with appeals against orders of acquittal. In dealing with such appeals, the High Court naturally bears in mind the presumption of innocence in favour of an accused person and cannot lose sight of the fact that the said presumption is strengthened by the order of acquittal passed in his favour by the trial Court and so, the fact that the accused person is entitled to the benefit of a reasonable doubt will always be present in the mind of the High Court when it deals with the merits of the case. As an appellate Court the High Court is generally slow in disturbing the finding of fact recorded by the trial Court, particularly when the said finding is based on an appreciation of oral evidence because the trial Court has the advantage of watching the demeanour of the witnesses who have given evidence. Thus, though the powers of the High Court in dealing with an appeal against acquittal are as wide as those which it has in dealing with an appeal against conviction, in-dealing with the former class of appeals, its approach is governed by the overriding consideration flowing from the presumption of innocence. Sometimes ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at his trial. Therefore, the test suggested by the expression substantial and compelling reasons should not be construed as a formula which has to be rigidly applied in every case. That is the effect of the recent decisions of this Court, for instance, in Sanwat Singh v. State of Rajasthan, AIR 1961 SC 715 and Harbans Singh v. The State of Punjab, AIR 1962 SC 439; and so, it is not necessary that before reversing a judgment of acquittal, the High Court must necessarily characterise the findings recorded therein as perverse. Therefore, the question which we have to ask ourselves in the present appeals is whether on the material produced by the prosecution, the High Court was justified in reaching the conclusion that the prosecution case against the appellants had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt, and that the contrary view taken by the trial Court was erroneous. In answering this question, we would, no doubt, consider the salient and broad features of the evidence in order to appreciate the grievance made by the appellants against the conclusions of the High Court. But under Article 136 we would ordinarily be reluctant to interfere with the finding of fact recorded by the Hi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se of acquittal.--(1) Save as otherwise provided in sub-section (2) and subject to the provisions of sub-sections (3) and (5), the State Government may, in any case, direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal to the High Court from an original or appellate order of acquittal passed by any court other than a High Court, or an order of acquittal passed by the Court of Session in revision. (2) If such an order of acquittal is passed in any case in which the offence has been investigated by the Delhi Special Police Establishment constituted under the Delhi Special Police Establishment Act, 1946 (25 of 1946), or by any other agency empowered to make investigation into an offence under any Central Act other than this Code, the Central Government may also direct the Public Prosecutor to present an appeal, subject to the provisions of sub-section (3), to the High Court from the order of acquittal. (3) No appeal under sub-section (1) or sub-section (2) shall be entertained except with the leave of the High Court. (4) If such an order of acquittal is passed in any case instituted upon complaint and the High Court, on an application made to it by the complainant ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his innocence is certainly not weakened but reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court. *** *** *** 34. From the above decisions, in Chandrappa and Ors. v. State of Karnataka, 2007(2) RCR (Criminal) 92: 2007(4) SCC 415), the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal were culled out: (1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. (2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law. (3) Various expressions, such as, substantial and compelling reasons , good and sufficient grounds , very strong circumstances , distorted conclusions , glaring mistakes , etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of flourishes of language to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eason for interference. These aspects were highlighted by this Court in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade v. State of Maharashtra (1973 (2) SCC 793), Ramesh Babulal Doshi v. State of Gujarat (1996 (9) SCC 225), Jaswant Singh v. State of Haryana (2000 (4) SCC 484), Raj Kishore Jha v. State of Bihar (2003 (11) SCC 519), State of Punjab v. Karnail Singh (2003 (11) SCC 271), State of Punjab v. Phola Singh (2003 (11) SCC 58), Suchand Pal v. Phani Pal (2003 (11) SCC 527) and Sachchey Lal Tiwari v. State of U.P. (2004 (11) SCC 410). [Emphasis supplied] The Hon'ble Supreme Court has held in the matter of Nagbhushan V. State of Karnataka, (2021) 5 SCC 222, as under: 5.2 Before considering the appeal on merits, the law on the appeal against acquittal and the scope and ambit of Section 378 Cr.P.C. and the interference by the High Court in an appeal against acquittal is required to be considered. 5.2.1 In the case of Babu v. State of Kerala, (2010) 9 SCC 189, this Court had reiterated the principles to be followed in an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 Cr.P.C. 1973 In paragraphs 12 to 19, it is observed and held as under:- 12. This Court time and again has laid down t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ran (2007) 3 SCC 755). 15. In Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka (2007) 4 SCC 415, this Court reiterated the legal position as under (SCC P.432, para 42): (1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. (2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law. (3) Various expressions, such as, substantial and compelling reasons , good and sufficient grounds , very strong circumstances , distorted conclusions , glaring mistakes , etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of flourishes of language to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion. (4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when both the Sessions Court and the High Court have recorded an order of acquittal. A similar view has been reiterated by this Court in Dhanpal v. State (2009) 10 SCC 401. 19. Thus, the law on the issue can be summarised to the effect that in exceptional cases where there are compelling circumstances, and the judgment under appeal is found to be perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal. The appellate court should bear in mind the presumption of innocence of the accused and further that the trial court's acquittal bolsters the presumption of his innocence. Interference in a routine manner where the other view is possible should be avoided, unless there are good reasons for interference. (emphasis supplied) 5.2.2 When the findings of fact recorded by a court can be held to be perverse has been dealt with and considered in paragraph 20 of the aforesaid decision, which reads as under: 20. The findings of fact recorded by a court can be held to be perverse if the findings have been arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant/inadmissible material. The finding may also be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tely wrong assumption of a very material and clinching aspect in the peculiar circumstances of the case. 31.1 In Sambasivan v. State of Karala (1998) 5 SCC 412, the High Court reversed the order of acquittal passed by the learned trial court and held the accused guilty on reappreciation of the entire evidence on record, however, the High Court did not record its conclusion on the question whether the approach of the trial court in dealing with the evidence was patently illegal or the conclusions arrived at by it were wholly untenable.Confirming the order passed by the High Court convicting the accused on reversal of the acquittal passed by the learned trial court, after being satisfied that the order of acquittal passed by the learned trial court was perverse and suffered from infirmities, this Court declined to interfere with the order of conviction passed by the High Court. While confirming the order of conviction passed by the High Court, this Court observed in para 8 as under: (SCC p. 416) . 8. We have perused the judgment under appeal to ascertain whether the High Court has conformed to the aforementioned principles. We find that the High Court has not strictly p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ge was not justified in discarding the relevant/material evidence while acquitting the accused, the High Court, therefore, was fully entitled to re-appreciate the evidence and record its own conclusion. This Court scrutinised the evidence of the eyewitnesses and opined that reasons adduced by the trial court for discarding the testimony of the eyewitnesses were not at all sound. This Court also observed that as the evaluation of the evidence made by the trial court was manifestly erroneous and therefore it was the duty of the High Court to interfere with an order of acquittal passed by the learned Sessions Judge. 31.3. In Atley v. State of U.P. AIR 1955 SC 807, in para 5, this Court observed and held as under: (AIR pp. 809-10). 5. It has been argued by the learned counsel for the appellant that the judgment of the trial court being one of acquittal, the High Court should not have set it aside on mere appreciation of the evidence led on behalf of the prosecution unless it came to the conclusion that the judgment of the trial Judge was perverse. In our opinion, it is not correct to say that unless the appellate court in an appeal under Section 417 Cr.PC came to the concl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... settled law as has been held in C. Antony Vs. K.G. Raghavan Nair, 2002(4) RCR (Criminal) 750 that even if a second view on appreciation of evidence is possible, the Court will not interfere in the acquittal of the accused. In the cases of acquittal, there is double presumption in his favour; first the presumption of innocence, and secondly the accused having secured an acquittal, the Court will not interfere until it is shown conclusively that the inference of guilt is irresistible. [Emphasis supplied] This Court Rekha Versus State of Haryana another, 2019(4) R.C.R. (Criminal) 294 , held as under:- 13.While granting the leave applied for, this Court is to bear in mind that in case of acquittal there is a double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the Fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence that every person is presumed to be innocent unless he is proved to be guilty by a competent Court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is certainly not weakened but re-inforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial Court. When two reasonable concl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
