9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1839X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e may be construed as substantial and compelling reasons and the first appellate court may interfere in the order of acquittal. The High Court, while convicting the Appellant has confirmed the judgment of acquittal passed in favour of the Accused Nos. 2 to 5. Their acquittal as confirmed by the High Court is not questioned by the State before this Court. Thus, the judgment of the High Court acquitting Accused Nos. 2 to 5 has attained finality. Therefore, it is clear that the Trial Court and the High Court have, on facts, not believed the case of the prosecution in respect of the assault by the Accused Nos. 2 and 3 - Absolutely no material is found against the Appellant herein to convict him for the offences Under Section 302 Indian Penal Code inasmuch as he had not played any role in the death of the two deceased. In addition to the same, both the Courts have, on facts concluded that there was no common intention on the part of the accused, in commission of crime. The Appellant is acquitted of the offence punishable Under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. Consequently, the judgment of the High Court convicting him for the said offence stands set aside - judgment passed by the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Penal Code. The Trial Court acquitted all the accused, after evaluation of the material on record and after hearing both the parties. As mentioned supra, the High Court confirmed the judgment of acquittal passed by the Trial Court in respect of the Accused Nos. 2 to 5. However, the High Court set aside the judgment of the Trial Court acquitting the Appellant and consequently convicted him for the offences punishable Under Sections 302 and 326, Indian Penal Code. 3. Mr. Shanthkumar V. Mahale, advocate, appearing on behalf of the Appellant, having taken us through the material on record submits that the High Court reversed the well-considered judgment of the Sessions Court qua the Appellant herein even though there is no cogent evidence against the Appellant. The first appellate court should not have interfered with the judgment of acquittal, particularly when the judgment of acquittal was based on settled principles of law as well as on due appreciation of the evidence on record. The judgment of acquittal cannot be said to be perverse, and the view taken by the Trial Court is one of the possible views under the facts and circumstances of the case, hence the High Court should not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... place inside the house of Smt. Honnamma (PW. 23), therefore, it is but natural that there was no other eye-witness except PW. 23. Three persons sustained injuries and out of them two persons, namely Kumari Radhika and Smt. Manjula, succumbed to the injuries. The incident has taken place in broad daylight at about 4:30 p.m. It is not the story of the prosecution that the Accused persons closed the door after trespassing into the house and committed the offences secretly; on the other hand, according to the prosecution, the Accused have committed the offence openly. None of the neighbouring witnesses had come for the help of the deceased and injured. Although the prosecution examined two neighbouring witnesses, they are not the eye-witnesses. 7. Looking to the evidence on record, the Trial Court as well as the High Court were justified in concluding that the incident had taken place for the reason of a property dispute. 8. Specific overt act had been attributed to the Appellant by the informant (PW. 23) not only in her first information but also in her deposition. She has categorically deposed that the Appellant assaulted her with chopper; neither did the Appellant assault the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed by the High Court, to reverse the judgment of acquittal passed in favour of Appellant. 10. It is by now well settled that the Appellate Court hearing the appeal filed against the judgment and order of acquittal will not overrule or otherwise disturb the Trial Court's acquittal if the Appellate Court does not find substantial and compelling reasons for doing so. If the Trial Court's conclusion with regard to the facts is palpably wrong; if the Trial Court's decision was based on erroneous view of law; if the Trial Court's judgment is likely to result in grave miscarriage of justice; if the entire approach of the Trial Court in dealing with the evidence was patently illegal; if the Trial Court judgment was manifestly unjust and unreasonable; and if the Trial Court has ignored the evidence or misread the material evidence or has ignored material documents like dying declaration/report of the ballistic expert etc. the same may be construed as substantial and compelling reasons and the first appellate court may interfere in the order of acquittal. However, if the view taken by the Trial Court while acquitting the Accused is one of the possible views under the facts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ission of crime. 12. It is not in dispute that the injured, Smt. Honnamma (PW. 23) sustained grievous injury as a result of assault by the Appellant. She was referred to a neurologist for an expert opinion inasmuch as she had sustained an incised wound over the left parietal area. She had also sustained a fracture at the lower end of her right forearm. Since the evidence of PW. 23 in respect of an overt act by the Appellant in injuring Smt. Honnamma is believable, in our considered opinion, the High Court was justified in convicting the Appellant for the offence Under Section 326, Indian Penal Code, but was not justified in convicting the Appellant for the offence Under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed in part, in terms of the following order: (a) The Appellant is acquitted of the offence punishable Under Section 302, Indian Penal Code. Consequently, the judgment of the High Court convicting him for the said offence stands set aside. (b) The judgment passed by the High Court convicting the Appellant for the offence Under Section 326 Indian Penal Code and sentencing him for imprisonment of 7 years stands confirmed and is imposed a fine of R ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
