REPORTABLE

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO(s). 749 OF 2005

C. RONALD & ANR.

..

Appellant (s)

VERSUS

STATE, U.T. OF ANDAMAN

& NICOBAR ISLANDS

..

Respondent(s)

O R D E R

1.

Heard learned counsel for the parties.

2.

This Appeal has been filed against the impugned judgment dated

01.10.2004 passed by the Calcutta High Court, Circuit Bench at Port Blair,

in Criminal Appeal No. 31 of 2002.

1

3.

The facts have been set out in great detail in the impugned judgment

and hence we are not repeating the same here except wherever necessary.

4.

It appears that on 26.11.1997 Sub Inspector Abdul Salam received a

secret information that in the evening of 25.11.1997 C. Ronald, appellant

No. 1 herein, participated in a gambling. Some hundred rupees notes which

were sought to be used by him in the gambling were not accepted by the co-

gamblers on the ground that they were fake, whereafter Ronald left the

place. He was searched by S.I. Abdul Salam and fake currency notes of Rs.

100 denomination were recovered from his chest pocket. Panchnama was

prepared and he was arrested. During interrogation Ronald disclosed the

name of other co-accused. One Arun disclosed the name of R. Anil Kumar,

appellant No. 2 herein.

5.

Disclosures made by Arun and Anil Kumar were also referred to in

the impugned judgment. During the investigation 42 fake notes were

recovered from the house of Ronald wrapped in a red handkerchief from

inside a shoe. Each of these notes bore the same serial number. Some fake

currency notes were given by Anil to Arun, who tore them up and threw

them into a toilet, where these torn pieces were recovered from the septic

tank.

2

6.

The trial court acquitted the accused persons, but the High Court has

reversed that judgment and convicted the accused persons.

7.

Mr. Shanti Bhushan, learned senior counsel appearing for the

appellants, contends that the trial court having taken a view and acquitted the

appellants, the High Court ought not to have reversed the same. He has

relied upon a decision of this Court in Shingara Singh vs. State of Haryana,

(2003) 12 SCC 758 [para 26], wherein it was observed :-

“... It is well settled that in an appeal against acquittal the

High Court is entitled to re-appreciate the entire evidence

on record but having done so, if it finds that the view

taken by the trial court is a possible reasonable view of

the evidence on record, it will not substitute its opinion

for that of the trial court. Only in cases where the High

Court finds that the findings recorded by the trial court

are unreasonable or perverse or that the court has

committed a serious error of law, or where the trial court

had recorded its findings in ignorance of relevant

material on record or by taking into consideration

evidence which is not admissible, the High Court may be

justified in reversing the order of acquittal...”

8.

Mr. Shanti Bhushan has also shown us some other decisions which

have taken the same view.

9.

In this connection we would like to say that a judgment of a court of

law should not be read as a Euclid’s theorem nor as a provision in a statute,

vide Bharat Petroleum Corporation vs. N.R. Vairamani, AIR 2004 S.C. 4778

3

(vide paragraphs 9 to 12), Dr. Rajbir Singh Dalal vs. Chaudhary Devi Lal

University J.T. 2008 (8) S.C. 621, etc.

10.

Section 386 (a) Cr.P.C. states that the appellate court may :

“in an appeal from an order of acquittal, reverse such

order and direct that further inquiry be made, or that the

accused be re-tried or committed for trial, as the case

may be, or find him guilty and pass sentence on him

according to law”.

11.

A perusal of Section 386(a) Cr.P.C. shows that no restrictions have

been placed by the Statute on the power of the appellate court to reverse an

order of acquittal and convict the accused.

12.

As observed by th