Back
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Khem Chand, S/o. Shri Gopiram – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan, Through PP – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
(Manoj Kumar Garg, J.)
1. Instant criminal appeal has been filed by the appellant-complainant under Section 372 Cr.P.C. against the acquittal of the accused-respondent No.2 from offences under Sections 341, 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act vide judgment dated 20.09.2022 passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST Court Cases, Churu in Sessions Case No.165/2018.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the appellant-complainant Khem Chand submitted a written report before concerned Police Station to the effect that on 10.10.2017, when he was grazing cattle in the field of Mularam Meghwal, accused-respondent No.2 came and assaulted him with stick and also used caste oriented language.
3. On the said complaint, FIR was registered against the accused-respondent and Police started investigation. After investigation, the police filed FR against the accused-respondent but subsequently cognizance was taken against the accused-respondent No.2 for offence under Sections 341, 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) of SC/ST Act. Thereafter, the charges of the case were framed against the accused-respondent No.2, who denied the charges and claimed trial.
4. During the course of trial, the pros
The court upheld the acquittal due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the need for compelling reasons to overturn such judgments.
An acquittal can only be overturned with compelling reasons; the presumption of innocence remains strong unless the trial court's decision is palpably erroneous.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence under the SC/ST Act, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
The principle that an acquittal should not be disturbed unless there are compelling reasons, and the presumption of innocence is reinforced by such acquittal.
An acquittal should not be disturbed unless compelling reasons exist, maintaining the presumption of innocence.
An acquittal can only be overturned on compelling reasons; the presumption of innocence remains unless the trial court's decision is palpably erroneous.
The prosecution failed to prove the charges under the SC/ST Act, justifying the acquittal, while the trial court's decision to grant probation for IPC convictions was upheld.
The presumption of innocence is strengthened by acquittal, and appellate courts can only interfere if the trial court's view is unreasonable or if guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt.
Interference in acquittal requires compelling reasons; the presumption of innocence is reinforced by acquittal.
The court upheld the acquittal of the accused due to lack of compelling evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
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
