Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
RAKESH KAINTHLA
Vibhuti – Appellant
Versus
Saurabh – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. trial acquittal due to divorce estoppel and evidence lack (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 5 , 6) |
| 2. stridhan rights persist; settlement bars proceedings argued (Para 7 , 8 , 9 , 10) |
| 3. interfere with acquittal only if patently perverse (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 4. mutual divorce settlement estops stridhan criminal complaint (Para 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 5. stridhan proof academic post-settlement estoppel (Para 19 , 20) |
| 6. appeal dismissed; no interference in acquittal (Para 21 , 23) |
JUDGMENT :
Rakesh Kainthla, J.
The present appeal is directed against the judgment dated 21.01.2025, passed by learned Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mandi, H.P. (learned Trial Court) vide which the respondents (accused before learned Trial Court) were acquitted of the commission of offences punishable under Section 406 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). (The 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 complainant filed a complaint before the learned Trial Court against the accused for the commission of offences punishable under Sections 40
Mutual consent divorce settlement without reserving liberty estops wife from pursuing criminal complaint for stridhan retention by husband and relatives.
The appellate court upheld the trial Court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity for compelling evidence to overturn such decisions.
The judgment emphasized the presumption of innocence, the principles for interference with a judgment of acquittal, and the need for trustworthy evidence to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal of respondents due to insufficient evidence of cruelty and abetment of suicide, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the need for substa....
The judgment emphasizes the need for substantial and compelling reasons to disturb the finding of acquittal and the duty of the appellate court to re-evaluate evidence to prevent miscarriage of justi....
The appellate court must respect the trial court's acquittal unless there is a clear error, reaffirming the presumption of innocence.
Point of Law : The scope of Section 378 of Cr.P.C., in dealing with an appeal against the order of acquittal is to be borne in mind.
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt; acquittal is upheld when evidence does not convincingly establish guilt.
In appeals against acquittal, courts must respect the presumption of innocence and should only interfere if the trial's conclusions are shown to be perverse or based on erroneous appreciation of evid....
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
