Back
2026 Supreme(Raj) 327
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN BENCH AT JAIPUR
MAHENDAR KUMAR GOYAL, BHUWAN GOYAL, JJ.
Sunil Kumar Son of Shri Kailash Chand - Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan Through Public Prosecutor - Respondent
D.B. Criminal Appeal No. 421 of 2025
Decided On : 28-04-2026
Important Points
Subject
Criminal Law - Appellate Jurisdiction
Act Referred
Headnote
(B) Reversal of acquittal - Scope of interference - Appellate court can reverse a judgment of acquittal only if it suffers from patent perversity, is based on misreading or omission of material evidence, or where no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with guilt is possible from the evidence on record (Para 39).
Facts of the case:
Information not provided in the provided text.
Findings of Court:
The court reiterated that the scope of interference by an appellate court to reverse an acquittal is limited to cases involving patent perversity, misreading of material evidence, or where guilt is the only possible conclusion based on the record.
Issues: The determination of the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction when hearing an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 Cr.PC.
Ratio Decidendi: An appellate court should not overturn an acquittal simply because another view is possible; interference is only justified if the trial court's view is not a possible one or if the evidence proves guilt beyond a reasonable doubt to the exclusion of any other conclusion.
Result: Information not provided in the provided text.
Legal Category Hierarchy
-
practice and procedure
-
appeals
-
appeal against acquittal
- scope of interference
-
appeal against acquittal
-
evidence
- reappreciation of evidence
-
appeals
For the Appellant : Mr. Ramavtar, Adv.
For the Respondent: Mr. Naresh Kumar Gupta, PP
JUDGMENT :
BHUWAN GOYAL, J.
“38. Further, in H.D. Sundara v. State of Karnataka , (2023) 9 SCC 581 this Court summarised the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 Cr.PC as follows:
“8. xxx xxx xxx
8.1. The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence;
8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;
8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after re-appreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;
8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and
8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible.”
39. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:
(a) That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity;
(b) That the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record; and
(c) That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record.”
