Whether the High Court was right in setting aside the acquittal of the Appellants and convicting them for an offence of murder. While holding that there is no limitation placed on the power to review the evidence in an appeal against acquittal,?
Apex court held that The reasons given by the trial court for acquittal mainly pertain to the delay in lodging the FIR, untrustworthy eye witnesses [ panchanama prepared at police station but not at death spot], improbability of identification of the accused [ laterin light behind the mob – non seizer of Torch light deposed by witness] , non- examination of independent witnesses, previous enmity between the accused and the witnesses, nonproduction of important prosecution witnesses and improper investigation of the case.-By differing with the view taken by the trial court on the above points, the High Court found
that the judgment of the trial court is perverse and that there is only one view possible which leads to the guilt of the accused. –The High Court could not have reversed a judgment of acquittal merely because another view is possible. The High Court brushed aside the findings
recorded by the trial court relating to certain omissions as being minor and held the omissions should not have been the basis on which the Appellants have been acquitted. The High Court ignored the fact that the presumption of innocence in favour of the
Appellants is further strengthened by an order of acquittal. No perversity in the judgment of the trial court in acquitting the Appellants has been demonstrated by the High Court for interfering with the judgment of the trial court. For the aforementioned reasons, the Appeals are allowed. The judgment of the High Court is set aside and the judgment of the trial court is restored.