Jammu & Kashmir High Court Directs Construction of Overhead Bridge or Underpass on Ring Road for Safe Passage of Villagers    |     Minor Injuries No Bar for Framing Charges Under Section 307 IPC if Intent to Kill is Present: Supreme Court    |     Prosecution's Case Full of Glaring Doubts:  Supreme Court Overturns Conviction in Abduction and Murder Case    |     Allegations of Dowry Demand in FIR Found Vague and Driven by Civil Property Dispute: Supreme Court Quashes FIR and Chargesheet in Dowry-Cruelty Case    |     Local Police Failed to Perform its Duties: SC Directs New Investigating Officer in Property Dispute    |     Paternity Established Through SSC and Appointment Order, Legal Obligation to Maintain Unmarried Daughter: Andhra Pradesh High Court    |     No Appeal Shall Be Heard Without Disputed Tax Deposit: Bombay High Court Upholds Constitutionality of Section 96(b) of the Cantonment Act, 2006    |     Parties Must Choose Peace Over Litigation: Calcutta High Court Denies FIR Quashing in Family Dispute, Highlights Mediation Option    |     Punjab & Haryana High Court Quashes Recruitment of 1091 Assistant Professors and 67 Librarians In Punjab Due to Procedural Flaws    |     Res Judicata Bars Reconsideration of Adoption Validity in Second Round of Litigation: Jammu & Kashmir High Court    |     Candidates who use a party’s symbol must be deemed members of that party: Kerala High Court Upholds Disqualification for Defection    |     Inconsistencies in Eyewitness Accounts and Lack of Forensic Certainty Lead to Acquittal: Himachal Pradesh High Court Acquits Accused in Murder Case    |     Delhi High Court Quashes Reassessment Notices Under Section 148 Due to Invalid Sanction by JCIT    |     Summons Under PMLA for Further Investigation Does Not Infringe Right Against Self-Incrimination: Telangana HC    |     Termination During Probation Is Lawful if Concealment of Criminal Case Is Proven: Allahabad HC    |     Disproportionate Fine Cannot Be Imposed for Recovery of 1 Liter of Country-made Liquor: Patna High Court    |     Prosecution failed to prove identity of remains and establish murder beyond reasonable doubt: Orissa High Court Acquit Ex-Husband    |     Despite 12 Injuries on the Victim, No Intention to Kill Found: Rajasthan High Court Upholds Conviction Under Section 304 Part-II IPC    |     Governor’s sanction suffers from non-application of mind: Karnataka High Court Stays Governor’s Sanction for Investigation Against CM Siddaramaiah    |    

Acquittal Set Aside: Orders Reconsideration of Acquittal in Fraud Case: Bombay High Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a recent judgement, the judicial bench led by Justice Prakash D. Naik issued a groundbreaking judgment on October 20, 2023, mandating the revaluation of a contentious acquittal in a complex criminal case. The decision, which pertains to various sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), sets a precedent for revisiting cases of acquittal under specific circumstances.

The judgment stems from an appeal challenging the acquittal of the accused on charges including Sections 181, 420, 465, 468, 471, 406, and 34 of the IPC. The Appellate Court had initially affirmed the acquittal under these sections but also found merit in the application of Section 406 of the IPC against one of the respondents. The revision application sought the overturning of the acquittal and a fresh examination of the evidence.

Justice Naik, in his observation, emphasized the need for a comprehensive reevaluation of the case. He stated, "The evidence on record and the observations of both the Courts and observation of the Appellate Court would indicate that the documents collected by the Investigating Officer referred to herein above were admissible. The Appellate Court has also referred to incriminating evidence against respondent nos. 1 and 2."

The judgment further highlighted the critical nature of intent and evidence in the case, with Justice Naik noting, "Evidence and Intent – Examination of evidence and intention of the accused – Observations by the Appellate Court regarding the admissibility of documents and incriminating evidence – Remand ordered to re-evaluate charges under Sections 406, 420, 465, 468, 471, read with Section 34 of IPC – No express findings on the merits of the case."

In a procedural order, the impugned judgment and order were set aside, and directions were issued for the rehearing of appeals before the Sessions Court. Parties involved were instructed to appear before the Appellate Court, with a strict time frame of six months set for deciding the appeals. It was explicitly stated that the court had not expressed any opinion on the merits of the case.

This landmark decision has the potential to influence future cases involving reconsideration of acquittals under specific legal provisions. The legal fraternity awaits further developments in this case as it proceeds for fresh consideration before the Appellate Court.

Date of Decision: 20 October 2023

Dr. (Mrs.) Nirmala Jaywant Patil  VS . Mr. Arjitsingh Dattajirao Ghatge,

Similar News