PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI, MUNNURI LAXMAN
State of Rajasthan – Appellant
Versus
Sukhdev Ram, Son of Gangaram – Respondent
ORDER :
1. This criminal appeal under Section 378 (3) & (1) of the Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the appellant-State laid a challenge to the judgment of acquittal dated 16.01.1999, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge Parbatsar in Sessions Case No.4/1998 (State of Rajasthan Vs. Sukhdevram & Ors), whereby the accused respondents were acquitted for the offence under Sections 302 & 120B of the Indian Penal Code.
2. The matter pertains to an incident which occurred in the year 1986 and the present appeal has been pending since the year 1999.
3. At the outset, Mr. G.R. Punia, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Mr. Sanjay Rewar, appearing on behalf of the accused-respondents, submits that accused-respondent no.1-Sukhdev and accused-respondent no.2-Bhanwarlal had already expired.
3.1. In this view of the matter, the instant appeal qua deceased accused-respondent No.1-Sukhdev and deceased accused-respondent No.2-Bhanwarlal stands abated. Thus, now this appeal is surviving only qua accused-respondent No.3-Bhagirath, and the same is adjudicated only to the extent of the surviving accused-respondent-Bhagirath.
4. Brief facts of the case, as placed before this Court by the learned GA-cu
Mallappa & Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, Criminal Appeal No. 1162/2011
Babu Sahebagouda Rudragoudar and Ors. Vs. State of Karnataka, Criminal Appeal No. 985/2010
The judgment reinforces that an acquittal can only be overturned if the appellate court finds clear evidence of error or illegality in the trial court's decision.
The judgment reinforces the principle that an acquittal should not be overturned unless there is clear evidence of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The presumption of innocence remains until guilt is proven beyond a reasonable doubt, and the appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal without clear evidence of error or illegality in the trial c....
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the necessity of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, particularly when eyewitness testimony is unreliable.
The court upheld the acquittal of the accused due to insufficient evidence and unreliable eyewitness testimonies, emphasizing the necessity of proving guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
The acquittal of the accused was upheld due to insufficient evidence and contradictions in eyewitness testimonies, emphasizing the burden of proof on the prosecution.
The appellate court cannot overturn an acquittal unless it finds a clear error or illegality in the trial court's judgment.
The judgment reinforces the principle that an acquittal should not be overturned unless there is clear evidence of error or misjudgment by the trial court.
The presumption of innocence and the burden of proof require that the prosecution must establish intent and sufficient evidence for a murder conviction.
The appellate court must demonstrate clear error or illegality to overturn an acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.