Back
RAJIV GUPTA, MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA
State of Uttar Pradesh – Appellant
Versus
Balwan Singh – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard Sri Jitendra Kumar Jaiswal, learned A.G.A. for the State/appellant and Sri Subhash Chandra Tiwari, learned counsel for respondent No. 1 to 4. We have perused the record and also the impugned judgment under challenge in this appeal.
2. The trial court has acquitted the accused-respondents for charge under Sections 366 and 376 IPC, vide judgment and order dated 08.04.2015 passed by learned Additional District and Session Judge/FTC, Kanpur Dehat in S.T. No. 233 of 2010 (State vs. Balwan Singh and others). This appeal under 378(3) of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Cr.P.C.) has been preferred at the instance of the State as Government Appeal against the impugned judgment and order.
3. The brief facts of the case as appeared from FIR and other material on record are that the defacto complainant Munna Lal had given a written report on 22.04.2009 at Police Station concerned, on the basis of which Chick FIR (Ext. Ka-2) was drawn by Head Constable Sudhakar Singh on 22.4.2009 at 11:00 hours under Section 363 and 366 IPC at Police Station Rura, District Kanpur Dehat. The informant stated in his written report that on 07.04.2009 his minor daughter
The appellate court upheld the trial court's acquittal, emphasizing the presumption of innocence and the necessity of compelling reasons to overturn such a decision.
The prosecution must prove the accused's guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and the absence of corroborating evidence can weaken the case.
The presumption of innocence remains strong in acquittals, and the prosecution must prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, especially in cases involving minors.
Point of law: In any event the High Court entertained an appeal treating to be an appeal against acquittal, it was in fact exercising revisional jurisdiction. Even while exercising an appellate power....
The prosecution must prove charges beyond reasonable doubt, including establishing the victim's age and non-consent; failure to do so justifies acquittal.
The prosecution must establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt; failure to do so entitles the accused to acquittal.
In rape cases, a victim's credible testimony can obviate the need for corroboration; if deemed incredible, corroboration becomes essential for a conviction.
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
