Facts

The appellants, along with others, were charged with offences under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148 read with 149 and 120B IPC for the murders of Mulaim Singh, Munshi Singh, Itwari, and Ram Murti on 27 June 1977 at around 5 p.m. in Village Khiria Madhukar, Police Station Usehat, District Badaun, U.P. (!) [1000063410002] The FIR, lodged by Bhawar Pal Singh (PW1) at 10 p.m., alleged that 11 named accused persons, led by Pt. Hori Lal (A1) and armed with guns, ballams, kantas, and lathis, encircled the victims' house, fired shots from all sides, killing three victims on the roof and one on the ground after assaulting him with lathi, ballam, and kanta; they also took away Mulaim Singh's licensed gun. [1000063410002] The trial court acquitted all accused on 19 August 1978, finding major contradictions between the FIR and witness depositions (PWs 1, 4, 6), improvements in evidence, variance in injuries and place of incident (e.g., no gunshot wounds in post-mortems despite FIR and panchanamas mentioning them; new case in court that guns were fired in air and deaths caused by other weapons), unreliable eye-witnesses (interested, inconsistent identifications), and failure to prove case beyond reasonable doubt or conspiracy. (!) [1000063410004][1000063410012][1000063410014][1000063410015][1000063410016] The High Court, in the State's appeal, convicted nine accused (including appellants as A2-A6), acquitting two, but agreed on no conspiracy. (!) [1000063410013] The appellants appealed to the Supreme Court under Section 2(A) of the Supreme Court (Enlargement of Criminal Appellate Jurisdiction) Act, 1971. [1000063410001]

Ratio

In an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court must be slow to disturb findings of fact recorded by the trial court, which had the advantage of observing witness demeanour, and should not interfere merely because another view of the evidence is possible; the presumption of innocence is reinforced by acquittal, and the accused is entitled to the benefit of reasonable doubt where prosecution fails to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt, especially amid material contradictions (e.g., between FIR, depositions, panchanamas, and medical evidence) and unreliable witness testimony. [1000063410006][1000063410007][1000063410008][1000063410017][1000063410018] The High Court erred in substituting its view for the trial court's probable findings without compelling reasons; appeal allowed, High Court judgment set aside, trial court acquittal upheld. [1000063410014][1000063410017][1000063410019]