HIGH COURT OF RAJASTHAN (JODHPUR BENCH)
MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J
Shanti – Appellant
Versus
State – 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 10.01.2006, passed by learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Cases, Merta, District Nagaur in Session Case No.74/2005, whereby the learned trial court acquitted the accused-respondent Nos.2 & 3 from the offence punishable under Section 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(x) of SC/ST Act.
2. Brief facts of the case are that on 20.07.2005, the petitioner/complainant gave a written report to the Superintendent of Police, Nagaur to the effect that the accused-respondents No.2 & 3 beat her children namely Pappu and Munni in the school and also used caste oriented language against them. On the basis of the said report, Police registered a case against the accused-respondents and started investigation.
3. On completion of investigation, the police filed challan against accused-respondents. Thereafter, the trial court framed the charges. The accused-respondents denied the charges and claimed trial.
4. During the course of trial, the prosecution examined 8 witnesses and exhibited certain documents. Thereafter, statements of the accused-respo
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.
The principle that an acquittal should not be disturbed unless there are compelling reasons, and the presumption of innocence is reinforced by such acquittal.
Courts will only interfere with a judgment of acquittal in compelling circumstances, ensuring the presumption of innocence is maintained.
Acquittals should not be overturned unless compelling reasons are shown; the presumption of innocence is reinforced by an acquittal.
The court upheld the acquittal of the accused, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for compelling reasons to overturn such judgments.
An acquittal should not be disturbed unless compelling reasons exist, maintaining the presumption of innocence.
Acquittal judgments require compelling reasons for interference; presumption of innocence is reinforced 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 court upheld the acquittal due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the need for compelling reasons to overturn such judgments.
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.