1. Appeal against acquittal for offences under Sections 306 and 498A IPC — conviction by trial court overturned by High Court due to unreliable witness testimony. (Para 1 , 2 )
Back
Next 
2000 Supreme(SC) 573
2000(6) Supreme 469
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
G.B. Pattanaik & R.P. Sethi, JJ.
State of Haryana -Appellant
versus
Jai Parkash & Ors. -Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 219 of 1992
Decided on 14-3-2000
The Supreme Court will not interfere with a High Court's order of acquittal unless the appreciation of evidence is perverse or erroneous, particularly when the prosecution fails to produce the evidence of key witnesses for the Court's review.
Headnote:Indian Penal Code, 1860-Sections 302 and 498A-Abetment of suicide-Offence relating to marriage -Cruelty by hauband or his relatives -Charge against six persons-Trial Court acquitting four persons and convicting two-High Court acquitting convicted persons disbelieving evidence of father and brother of deceased-No perversity or erroneous approach in matter of appreciation of evidence by High Court-Acquittal order justified. (Para 3)
Legal Category Hierarchy
Table of Contents
2. State challenged the High Court's order of acquittal based on the re-appreciation of evidence. (Para 3 )
3. The High Court's finding that star witnesses' testimonies were unreliable due to multiple improvements was not perverse or erroneous. (Para 2 , 3 )
4. Interference with an order of acquittal is warranted only if the High Court's appreciation of evidence is perverse or erroneous. (Para 3 )
5. Appeal dismissed. (Para 3 )
6. Under what circumstances will an appellate court interfere with a High Court's order of acquittal?
An appellate court will interfere with an order of acquittal only if it finds that the High Court's appreciation of evidence was perverse or based on an erroneous approach. (Para 3 )
7. How do improvements in witness testimony affect the reliability of evidence in criminal appeals?
When star prosecution witnesses make numerous improvements in their testimony from stage to stage, it becomes difficult to place reliance on their testimony, which may justify an acquittal. (Para 2 )
8. What is the impact of a party's failure to produce evidence for the court's appreciation during an appeal?
Failure to produce the evidence of relevant witnesses for the court's appreciation may lead the court to rely on the lower court's findings, provided no perversity is evident in the impugned judgment. (Para 3 )
ORDER
The State of Haryana has preferred this appeal against six accused persons who stood tried for having committed offence under Sections 306 and 498A IPC. The learned trial Judge, on appreciation of evidence, acquitted four of them. The State did not carry any appeal to the High Court against the acquittal of those four persons.
2. The two convicted persons, namely, Jai Parkash and Shanti Devi preferred criminal appeal in the High Court of Punjab and Haryana against their conviction and sentence. The learned Judge re-appreciated the evidence and came to the conclusion that the two star prosecution witnesses, namely, the father and the brother of the deceased have made so many improvements in their testimony from stage to stage that it is difficult to place reliance on their testimony, and ultimately acquitted them of the charges levelled against.
3. The State though has preferred this appeal against the order of acquittal passed by the High Court, has not even produced a copy of the evidence of the two relevant witnesses, namely, the father and the brother of the deceased for appreciation of this Court. On going through the impugned judgment of the High Court, we do not find any perversity or erroneous approach in the matter of appreciation of evidence which requires interference of this Court. We accordingly dismiss this appeal.
(C.R.) Appeal dismissed.
**************
Parallel Citations of other Journals :
State of Haryana v. Jai Parkash & Ors., 2000(6) Supreme 469 : 2000 (7) JT 404 : 2000 (4) Crimes 107 : 2000 (3) All. Crl. L.R. 174
00018
