Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA
VIRENDER SINGH
Nishi Sharma – Appellant
Versus
Ashok Sharma – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. trial history of ipc 354/509 complaint and acquittal (Para 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 2. appellant challenges trial court's evidence assessment (Para 10 , 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16 , 17 , 18) |
| 3. conflicting witness evidence on incident presence (Para 19 , 20 , 21 , 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 4. appellate interference only if trial findings perverse (Para 26 , 27 , 28 , 29 , 30) |
| 5. delay and contradictions justify upholding acquittal (Para 31 , 32 , 33 , 34 , 35 , 36 , 37 , 38 , 39 , 40) |
| 6. appeal dismissed; trial judgment affirmed (Para 41 , 42) |
JUDGMENT :
Virender Singh, J.
Appellant-Dr. Nishi Sharma has filed the present appeal, under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘CrPC’), against the judgment of acquittal, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No. 1, Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as the ‘trial Court’).
2. By way of judgment, dated 26th September, 2011, the learned trial Court has dismissed the complaint, filed, under Sections 354 and 509 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as ‘IPC’), by petitioner-Dr. Nishi Sharma against respondent-Dr. Ashok Sharma.
3
In appeals against acquittal, interference only if trial findings perverse, ignoring material evidence, or guilt sole possible view; double innocence presumption applies.
Appellate courts interfere with acquittal only if perverse or ignoring material evidence; here, unexplained delay, witness contradictions rendered trial court's acquittal sustainable.
The appellate court must uphold acquittals unless the trial court's findings are perverse or unsustainable, respecting the presumption of innocence.
It is well settled by catena of decisions that an appellate Court has full power to review, re-appreciate and consider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
It is settled law that if main grounds on which lower Court has based its order acquitting accused are reasonable and plausible, and same cannot be entirely and effectively be dislodged or demolished....
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal due to insufficient evidence, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the principle that two reasonable views should not disturb the trial ....
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
