An appellate court may only interfere with an acquittal if there are compelling reasons or if the judgment is palpably erroneous, respecting the presumption of innocence.

Order

24/01/2024

Instant criminal leave to appeal has been filed by the appellant-complainant under Section 372 Cr.P.C . against the acquittal of the accused-respondent No.2 from offence under Sections 341, 323, 504/34 IPC vide judgment dated 17.06.2019 passed by learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Mount Abu in Cr. Original Case No.257/2010.

Brief facts of the case are that on 31.05.2008, a complaint was filed by the appellant-complainant before the court for offence under Sections 341, 323, 354 , 504 IPC inter-alia alleging therein that her marriage was solemnized with accused Hemant Kumar in the month of June, 2002 and out of the said wedlock, two children were born. Accused-respondent No.2 is father-in-law of the complainant. After marriage, the accused-persons started harassing the complainant physically and mentally for dowry.

On the basis of the said complaint, FIR was registered and Police started investigation. After investigation, the police filed challan against the accused-respondent No.2 and aganist accused Hemant Kumar for offence under Sections 341, 323, 504/34 IPC . Thereafter, the charges of the case were framed against the accused persons, who denied the charges and claimed trial.

During the course of trial, the prosecution examined eleven witnesses and exhibited various documents. Thereafter, statements of accused persons were recorded under section 313 Cr.P.C .

Upon conclusion of the trial, the learned trial court vide impugned judgment dated 17.06.2019 acquitted the accused- respondent No.2 from offence under Sections 341, 323, 504/34 IPC . Hence, this criminal appeal.

Learned counsel for the appellant-complainant submits that the learned trial court has committed grave error in acquitting the accused-respondent No.2 for offence under Sections 341, 323, 504/34 IPC . While passing the impugned judgment, the learned trial court has not considered the evidence and other aspects of the matter in its right perspective. Thus, the impugned judgment deserves to be quashed and set aside and the accused-respondent No.2 ought to have been convicted and sentenced for offence under Sections 341, 323, 504/34 IPC .

Learned Public Prosecutor and learned counsel for respondent No.2 have vehemently opposed the prayer made by the counsel for the petitioner and submitted that the order of acquittal is just and proper and therefore, no interference is required.

Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the evidence of the prosecution as well as defence and the judgment passed by the trial.

On perusal of the impugned judgment, it appears that the learned trial court while passing the impugned judgment has considered each and every aspect of the matter and also considered the evidence produced before it in its right perspective. There are major contradictions, omissions & improvements in the statements of the witnesses. The prosecution has failed to prove its case against the accused-respondent No.2 beyond all reasonable doubts and thus, the trial court has rightly acquitted the accused-respondent No.2 from offence under Sections 341, 323, 504/34 IPC .

In the light of aforesaid discussion, the appellant has failed to show any error of law or on facts on the basis of which interference can be made by this Court in the judgment under challenge.

In the case of 'Mrinal Das & others v. The State of Tripura, : 2011(9) SCC 479 ,' decided on September 5, 2011, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, after looking into many earlier judgments, has laid down parameters, in which interference can be made in a judgment of acquittal, by observing as under:

“An order of acquittal is to be interfered with only when there are "compelling and substantial reasons",for doing so. If the order is "clearly unreasonable", it is a compelling reason for interference. When the trial Court has ignored the evidence or misread the material evidence or has ignored material documents like dying declaration/report of ballistic experts etc.,the appellate court is compet