Back
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
ASHOK BHUSHAN, R. SUBHASH REDDY, M. R. SHAH, JJ.
State of Gujarat – Appellant
Versus
Bhalchandra Laxmishankar Dave – Respondent
Criminal Appeal No.99 of 2021 [Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 9105 of 2015]
Decided On : 02-02-2021
(A) Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 378 – Appeal against acquittal – An Appellate Court while dealing with appeal against acquittal passed by trial Court, is required to bear in mind that in case of acquittal there is double presumption in favour of accused – Firstly, presumption of innocence is available to him under fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law – Secondly, accused having secured his acquittal, presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by trial Court – While dealing with cases of acquittal by trial Court, Appellate Court would have certain limitations – Once appeal is entertained against order of acquittal, High Court is entitled to re-appreciate entire evidence independently and come to its own conclusion – Ordinarily, High Court would give due importance to opinion of Sessions Judge if same were arrived at after proper appreciation of evidence – High Court would be justified against an acquittal passed by Trial Court even on re-appreciation of entire evidence independently and come to its own conclusion that acquittal is perverse and manifestly erroneous – However, so far as appeal against order of conviction is concerned, there are no such restrictions and Court of appeal has wide powers of appreciation of evidence and High Court has to re-appreciate entire evidence on record being a First Appellate Court – Keeping in mind that once Trial Court has convicted there shall not be presumption of innocence as would be there in case of acquittal. (Para 6.2)
(B) Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 – Section 7 read with Sections 13(1) and 13(2) – Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 – Section 378 – Appeal against acquittal – There is no re-appreciation of entire evidence on record in detail while acquitting respondent-accused – High Court has only made general observations on depositions of witnesses examined – However, there is no re-appreciation of entire evidence on record in detail, which ought to have been done by High Court while dealing with judgment and order of conviction passed by Trial Court – High Court ought to have appreciated that it was dealing with first appeal against order of conviction passed by trial Court – Being First Appellate Court, High Court was required to re-appreciate entire evidence on record and also reasoning given by trial Court while convicting accused – Non-re-appreciation of evidence on record may affect case of either prosecution or even accused – High Court ought to have re-appreciated entire evidence on record without any limitation which might be there while dealing with an appeal against order of acquittal passed by Trial Court – High Court decision is based on totally erroneous view of law by ignoring settled legal position – Approach of the High Court in dealing/non-dealing with evidence was patently illegal leading to grave miscarriage of justice – Impugned judgment and order passed by High Court acquitting accused quashed and set aside – Appeal before High Court restored to its original file – High Court to decide and dispose of appeal in accordance with law. (Paras 6, 6.1, and 8)
Facts of the case:
Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with impugned judgment and order dated 12.01.2015 passed by the High Court of Gujarat in Criminal Appeal No.92 of 2003 by which the High Court has acquitted the respondent herein – original accused for offences under Section 7 read with Sections 13(1) & 13(2) of Prevention of Corruption Act by quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of conviction passed by Special Judge, Bharuch, State of Gujarat has preferred the present appeal.
Findings of Court:
High Court would be justified against an acquittal passed by Trial Court even on re-appreciation of the entire evidence independently and come to its own conclusion that acquittal is perverse and manifestly erroneous. However, so far as the appeal against order of conviction is concerned, there are no such restrictions and Court of appeal has wide powers of appreciation of evidence and High Court has to re-appreciate entire evidence on record being a First Appellate Court.
Result : Appeal allowed.
JUDGMENT :
M. R. SHAH, J.
1. Leave granted.
2. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 12.01.2015 passed by the High Court of Gujarat in Criminal Appeal No.92 of 2003 by which the High Court has acquitted the respondent herein – original accused for the offences under Section 7 read with Sections 13(1) & 13(2) of the Prevention of Corruption Act (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) by quashing and setting aside the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Learned Special Judge, Bharuch, the State of Gujarat has preferred the present appeal.
3. The respondent herein – original accused (hereinafter referred to as ‘the accused’) who was working as Assistant Director in ITI, Gandhi Nagar was charged for the offences punishable under Section 7 read with Sections 13(1) and 13(2) of the Act.
3.1 The Learned Special Judge, Bharuch after full-fledged trial and appreciation of the entire evidence on record and by detailed judgment and order convicted the accused under Section 7 read with Sections 13(1) and 13(2) of the Act. The Learned Special Judge held the accused guilty and convicted the accused for the aforesaid offences and imposed the sentence of 5 years imprisonment and with fine of Rs.10,000/.
3.2 Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the judgment and order of conviction and sentence passed by the Learned Special Judge in Special A.C.B. Case No.14/2000 the accused preferred appeal before the High Court being Criminal Appeal No.92 of 2003. By the impugned judgment and order, the High Court without any detailed re-appreciation of the entire evidence on record, has acquitted the accused for the offences for which he was convicted.
4. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court, the State of Gujarat has preferred the present appeal.
5. We have heard Ms. Deepanwita Priyanka, Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of State of Gujarat and Shri J.S. Attri, Learned Senior Advocate and Shri Haresh Raichura, Learned Advocate appearing on behalf of respondent – accused.
5.1. Number of submissions have been made by learned counsels of the respective parties. However, for the reasons stated herein below, we propose to remand the matter to the High Court, any observation made by this Court may affect either the prosecution or the defence, we refrain from dealing with the submissions made by the Learned counsels appearing on behalf of the respective parties on merits.
6. We have gone through the detailed judgment and order of conviction passed by the Learned Trial Court and also the evidence on record laid down by the prosecution as well as the defence. We have perused the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court to ascertain whether the High Court has conformed to the principles while exercising in the criminal appeal against the judgment and order of conviction. We find that the High Court has not strictly proceeded in the manner in which High Court ought to have while dealing with the appeal against the order of conviction. On perusal of the impugned judgment and order of acquittal passed by the High Court, we find that, as such, there is no re-appreciation of the entire evidence on record in detail while acquitting the respondent – accused. The High Court has only made general observations on the depositions of the witnesses examined. However, there is no re-appreciation of the entire evidence on record in detail, which ought to have been done by the High Court while dealing with the judgment and order of conviction passed by the Learned Trial Court.
6.1 The High Court ought to have appreciated that it was dealing with the first appeal against the order of conviction passed by the Learned trial Court. Being First Appellate Court, the High Court was required to re-appreciate the entire evidence on record and also the reasoning given by the Learned trial Court while convicting the accused. Non-re-appreciation of the ev
(1) Appeal against acquittal – Once appeal is entertained against order of acquittal, High Court is entitled to re-appreciate entire evidence independently and come to its own conclusion.(2) Once Tri....
(1) Once appeal is entertained against order of acquittal, High Court is entitled to reappreciate entire evidence independently and come to its own conclusion.(2) Against an order of acquittal passed....
The appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal unless the lower court's approach is vitiated by manifest illegality and the decision is characterized as perverse. The judgment and or....
The presumption of innocence in favor of the accused, the requirement of proof of demand for establishing acceptance of illegal gratification, and the reluctance to interfere with the judgment of acq....
The presumption of innocence in favor of the accused is reinforced by the trial court's acquittal, and appellate courts should only interfere with an order of acquittal in exceptional cases with comp....
An appellate court should refrain from disturbing an acquittal unless sufficiently compelling reasons justify it, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and proper evaluation of trial court decisio....
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
