MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Sanwla Ram – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
1. Instant criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 28.07.2004, passed by learned Addl. Chief Judicial Magistrate, Bhinmal in Regular Cr. Case No. 284/1998, whereby the learned trial court acquitted the accused-respondent No. 2 from the offence under Sections 279, 304A IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 11.05.1998, complainant Sanwla Ram submitted a written report at Police Station Bhinmal to the effect that at about 4:15 PM, two children namely Reti and Mahendra were playing outside the house of his uncle Maknaram, a roadways bus bearing No. RJ-06-P-0284 came in a rash and negligent manner and hit the child Reti. As a result of which, Reti died on the spot. The said roadways bus was being driven by accused respondent No. 2. Upon the aforesaid report, an FIR was registered and after usual investigation, charge-sheet came to be submitted against the accused-respondent No. 2 in the Court concerned.
3. The Learned Magistrate framed charge against the accused-respondent No. 2 for offences under Sections 279, 304A IPC and upon denial of guilt by the accused-respondent No. 2,
Acquittal judgments should not be interfered with unless compelling reasons exist, as the presumption of innocence is reinforced by acquittal.
The judgment reinforces the principle that the burden of proof lies with the prosecution to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and that acquittals should not be overturned without compelling re....
An appellate court may only interfere with a judgment of acquittal when there are compelling reasons, and the presumption of innocence remains fortified by acquittal.
Acquittals should not be overturned unless compelling reasons are shown; the presumption of innocence is reinforced by an acquittal.
The court emphasized that acquittal judgments should not be interfered with unless they are palpably erroneous or contrary to evidence, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
Acquittal judgments require compelling reasons for interference; presumption of innocence is reinforced by acquittal.
The court emphasized the high threshold for interfering with acquittal judgments, requiring compelling reasons to overturn a lower court's decision.
An acquittal strengthens the presumption of innocence, and an appellate court can only overturn such a judgment if it finds that the trial court's conclusion was unreasonable or unsupported by eviden....
The principle that an acquittal should not be disturbed unless there are compelling reasons, and the presumption of innocence is reinforced by such acquittal.
Interference in acquittal judgments requires compelling reasons; the presumption of innocence must be respected unless the lower court's decision is palpably erroneous.
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.