Back
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR
MR. JUSTICE MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J
Hemaram Meghwal, S/o. Shri Gomaji – Appellant
Versus
State Of Rajasthan – Respondent
Judgment :
(MANOJ KUMAR GARG, J.)
The appeal is time barred by 60 days. An application has been filed under Section 5 of Limitation Act for condonation of delay. For the reasons mentioned in the application, the application is allowed. The delay in filing the appeal is hereby condoned and the matter is taken up for hearing.
2. The appellant has filed the present criminal appeal being aggrieved by the judgment dt. 26.07.2024 passed by the learned Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act Cases, Pali in Sessions Case No. 253/2018 whereby, the learned trial court acquitted the respondent No.2 from the offence under Section 323 IPC and Section 3(1)(r)(s) & 3(2)(va) of SC/St (Prevention of Atrocities) Act.
3. Briefly, the facts of the case are that the appellate complainant filed a complaint before the court of Special Judge, SC/ST (Prevention of Atrocities) Act stating therein that complainant was working in a private hospital where one Varsha who was relative of a colleague was admitted for delivery. It was alleged that at the time of discharge, the accused respondent no.2, a relative of patient questioned the billing amount and started a brawl. It was alleged that when the comp
The appellate court upheld the acquittal, emphasizing that the prosecution failed to prove the charges beyond a reasonable doubt, reinforcing the presumption of innocence.
An acquittal can only be overturned if the trial court's decision is unreasonable or contrary to the evidence presented.
The court upheld the presumption of innocence in acquittals, stating that interference requires compelling reasons and substantial evidence.
An acquittal under the SC/ST Act can only be overturned if the appellate court finds compelling reasons, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity of substantial evidence.
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.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence under the SC/ST Act, emphasizing the presumption of innocence.
The court upheld the acquittal due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the need for compelling reasons to overturn such judgments.
The court will interfere in a judgment of acquittal only if there are compelling and substantial reasons to do so, and if the trial court has ignored or misread material evidence.
In appeals against acquittal, modifications are permitted only in cases of manifest illegality and substantial reasons, maintaining 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
