Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Mr. Justice Tarlok Singh Chauhan, Mr. Justice Sushil Kukreja, JJ
State of Himachal Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Shiv Kumar – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Sushil Kukreja, J.
The present appeal has been preferred by the appellant-State under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.PC) against the judgment of acquittal dated 07.11.2014 passed by the learned Special Judge-I, Shimla, H.P., in Sessions Trial No.4-S/7 of 2013, whereby the accused (respondent herein) was acquitted of the offence punishable under Section 20 of Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985 (for short, the ‘NDPS Act’).
2. Briefly stated the facts of the case, giving rise to instant appeal as per the prosecution story, are that on 28.09.2012, while a police party headed by Dy. SP Vijay Sharma, was on patrolling duty near Tara Devi, it received a secret information at about 10.30 A.M. that one person named Shiv Kumar, having Mobile No.8894164432, was coming from Dalash (Kullu) alongwith charas. On the basis of said information, police laid a naka and started checking the vehicles and when a bus bearing No.CH-01G-8893 came from Shimla side, it was stopped for checking and thereafter, when a person, sitting on Seat No.40, was asked to disclose his name, he disclosed his name as Shiv Kumar (accused/respondent herein), who was having a p
The acquittal of an accused cannot be overturned unless compelling evidence beyond reasonable doubt is provided, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the credibility of witness testimonies.
Appellate courts should not interfere with acquittal if trial court's view possible despite contradictions in police evidence and hostile independent witness, as suspicion cannot replace proof beyond....
Appellate courts should not interfere with acquittal in NDPS cases if trial court's view reasonable, absent perversity; material contradictions in police testimonies and non-association of independen....
Appellate courts uphold trial court acquittals in NDPS cases unless perverse; material contradictions in police testimonies, sealing discrepancies, and non-association of available independent witnes....
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless compelling reasons exist to overturn them, especially in cases of acquittal.
In NDPS acquittal appeals, courts interfere only if perverse; discrepancies in police evidence, non-association of available independent witnesses, seal issues, and custody gaps justify upholding acq....
The appellate court must respect the presumption of innocence and the trial court's findings unless compelling reasons exist to overturn an acquittal.
Appeal against acquittal – No interference is required with appeal against acquittal merely because some other view is possible.
The presumption of innocence strengthens after acquittal, and appellate courts should not overturn such findings unless compelling evidence demonstrates guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Appeal against NDPS acquittal dismissed upholding trial court due to contradictions in official testimonies, document/FIR anomalies, weight discrepancies creating reasonable doubt; appellate interfer....
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
