IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
State of H.P. – Appellant
Versus
Charanjeev – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAKESH KAINTHLA, J.
1. The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 18.05.2013, passed by learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Rajgarh, Camp at Sarahan, District Sirmaur, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondent (accused before learned Trial Court) was acquitted of the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of Indian Penal Code (in short “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 against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 279, 337 and 338 of the IPC. It was asserted that a bus was going from Mangarh towards Solan, and a pick-up bearing registration No. HP-71-0971 was going towards Mangarh on 15.05.2010 at 08:15 am. The driver of the pickup reversed his vehicle to enable the bus to pass. Yashpal (PW4) and Bhupinder Singh (PW5) were sitting on the motorcycle bearing registration No. HP-14A-0729, which was parked on the roadside. The pickup hit the motorcycle. Yas
An acquittal can be upheld when evidence does not unequivocally establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt, reaffirming the principle of presumption of innocence.
Mere 'high speed' testimony without specifics or skid marks insufficient for rash driving conviction; at intersections, side-road entrants must yield to main highway traffic; reasonable acquittals no....
Acquittal under IPC Sections 279/337 upheld as site plan showed accused vehicle on correct side, witnesses' vague 'high speed'/negligence opinions inadmissible, no specific negligence proved; appella....
Appellate court upholds acquittal unless patently perverse or ignores material evidence; trial court's reasonable assessment of unreliable witnesses, vague high speed, and consistent defense version ....
Appellate court upholds acquittal in rash driving case absent proof of negligence; interferes only if trial court's reasonable view perverse or ignores evidence, allowing doubt from possible mechanic....
High speed testimony without quantification insufficient for rash/negligent driving; no driving licence not per se negligence; acquittal upheld as trial view reasonable, no appellate interference abs....
Appellate courts interfere with acquittal only if perverse or ignoring material evidence; prosecution must ensure witness production despite summons; accused statements to police inadmissible as evid....
The appellate court should not interfere with acquittal unless the judgment suffers patent perversity or misreads material evidence.
In appeal against acquittal for rash driving causing death, uphold trial court's reasonable view based on photographic evidence and site plan showing truck on wrong side over eyewitnesses, unless pat....
An appellate court must not overturn a trial court's acquittal unless the trial court's view is impossible, potentially perverse, and the weight of evidence contradicts the acquittal.
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.