Back
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Het Ram S/o Prabhuram – Appellant
Versus
Lal Chand S/o Brijlal – Respondent
Manoj Kumar Garg, J.
JUDGMENT :
1. Instant criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner against the judgment dated 20.07.2006, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Raisinghnagar, District Sriganganagar in Cr. Appeal No.37/2005 whereby the learned appellate court allowed the appeal of the respondents No.1 to 5 and acquitted them from offence under Sections 147, 323, 325/149 IPC while reversing the judgment of conviction dated 28.06.2005, passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Sri Vijaynagar, District Sriganganagar in Cr. Case No.299/2003.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 01.06.2003, an FIR was registered at Police Station Sri Vijaynagar on the basis of a Parchabayan given by complainant Hetram, to the effect that when the complainant alongwith his family members was at his field, the accused persons came and started beating them by lathi and chain and thereafter they ran away. Upon registration of FIR, Police started investigation.
3. On completion of investigation, the police filed challan against the accused-respondents No.1 to 5. Thereafter, the trial court framed the charges against the accused-respondent No
The court emphasized the high threshold for interfering with acquittal judgments, requiring compelling reasons to overturn a lower court's decision.
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.
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.
The principle that an acquittal should not be disturbed unless there are compelling reasons, and the presumption of innocence is reinforced by such acquittal.
Acquittal judgments should not be interfered with unless compelling reasons exist, as the presumption of innocence is reinforced by acquittal.
An acquittal can only be overturned with compelling reasons; the presumption of innocence remains strong unless the trial court's decision is palpably erroneous.
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
