Back
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Asu S/o Goma Ji – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Instant criminal revision petition under Section 397/401 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the petitioner/complainant against the judgment dated 18.02.2005, passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, (Fast Track), Jalore Camp Bhinmal in Sessions Case No.76/2004 (40/2004), whereby the learned trial court acquitted the accused-respondent Nos.2 to 4 from the offences under Sections 376, 366, 382 IPC.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 14.07.2004, the petitioner-complainant gave a written report at Police Station Bhinmal to the effect that last night, his cousin sister went for answering call of nature, but she did not return back. On inquiry, one Kheta told that the accused namely Heera and Akabar forcibly took his sister in a Jeep. Subsequently, it was also came to know that the accused-respondents took his sister for marriage and for establishment of illicit relation. On this report, Police registered the case against the accused-respondents and started investigation.
3. On completion of investigation, the police filed challan against accused-respondents for offence under Sections 376, 366, 382 IPC. Thereafter, the trial court framed the charges against the accused-responde
The court upheld the acquittal of the accused, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for compelling reasons to overturn such judgments.
Acquittals should not be overturned unless compelling reasons are shown; the presumption of innocence is reinforced by an acquittal.
Acquittal judgments require compelling reasons for interference; presumption of innocence is reinforced 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 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.
Acquittal judgments should not be interfered with unless compelling reasons exist, as the presumption of innocence is reinforced by 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.
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 appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless there are compelling reasons, such as a clear misreading of evidence or ignoring material facts.
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
