Back
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Kishore S/o Bhagwan Ji – 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 27.01.2005, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge & Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities), Pratapgarh in Cr. Appeal No.17/2004 (23/2003) whereby the learned appellate court allowed the appeal of the respondents No.2 to 11 and acquitted them from offences under Sections 148, 452/149, 435/149, 427/149, 323/149, 324/149, 325/149 & 326/149 IPC while reversing the judgment of conviction dated 07.06.2003, passed by the learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Prataparh in Regular Cr. Case No.183/1993.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 13.10.1991, the petitioner-complainant filed a complaint before the concerned Police Station against the accused-respondents No.2 to 11 for offence under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 325, 326, 452, 435, 307 & 407 IPC. Upon which, Police registered an FIR and started investigation.
3. On completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the accused-respondents No.2 to 11. Thereafter, the trial court framed the charge against the accused-respondent Nos.2 to 7 for
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.
The court emphasized the high threshold for interfering with acquittal judgments, requiring compelling reasons to overturn a lower court's decision.
Acquittals should not be overturned unless compelling reasons are shown; the presumption of innocence is reinforced by an acquittal.
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.
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....
Interference in acquittal judgments requires compelling reasons; the presumption of innocence must be respected unless the lower court's decision is palpably erroneous.
Acquittal judgments require compelling reasons for interference; presumption of innocence is reinforced by acquittal.
Acquittal judgments should not be interfered with unless compelling reasons exist, as 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.
Interference in acquittal requires compelling reasons; the presumption of innocence is reinforced by acquittal.
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
