Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
State of HP – Appellant
Versus
Saroop Kumar – Respondent
The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 29.05.2013, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate 2nd Class, Dharamshala, District Kangra, H.P. (learned Trial Court), vide which the respondent (accused before the learned Trial Court) was acquitted of the commission of offences punishable under Sections 451 and 354 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). (Parties shall hereinafter be referred to in the same manner as they were arrayed before the learned Trial Court for convenience.)
2. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are that the police presented a challan before the learned Trial Court for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 451, 354 and 323 of the IPC. It was asserted that the informant/victim (name withheld to protect her identity) was present in her home on 15.07.2010 with her children. The accused entered her house at about 12 noon and molested her. She protested and accused gave her beatings. She shouted for help, and she was rescued by the passersby. She filed a complaint (Ext.PW1/A) before the police, and the police registered the FIR (Ext.PW4/A). Rajinder Kumar (PW9) investigated the matter. He visi
In appeals against acquittal, interference only if perverse or no reasonable view supports acquittal; unexplained FIR delay, material improvements in victim's testimony, and lack of corroboration jus....
Appellate interference with acquittal only if perverse, misreading evidence, or no reasonable acquittal view possible; unexplained FIR delay, witness contradictions, inconclusive medicals justify uph....
Appellate interference in acquittal appeals limited to perverse judgments ignoring evidence where only guilt view possible; unexplained FIR delay, unreliable interested witnesses justify upholding tr....
In criminal appeals against acquittal, the presumption of innocence strengthens upon acquittal, and appellate intervention is limited unless the trial court's judgment demonstrates illegality or irra....
An appellate court can only overturn an acquittal if the trial court's decision is perverse or based on a misapprehension of evidence, respecting the presumption of innocence.
Appellate courts interfere with acquittal only if perverse or no reasonable view possible; non-explanation of accused injuries, witness contradictions, inconsistent prosecution version justify uphold....
An acquittal reinforces the presumption of innocence, and the appellate court must show compelling reasons to overturn such a judgment, especially when the trial court's findings are plausible.
It is well settled that a prosecutrix complaining of having been a victim of offence of rape is not an accomplice after crime.
The absence of specific charges does not invalidate the conviction if the defense was aware of the allegations and evidence is duly presented, emphasizing the reliability of witnesses' testimonies in....
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
