Allegations In Matrimonial Disputes Must Be Specific And Supported By Foundation Facts To Avoid Abuse Of Process: Supreme Court Supreme Court Modifies Sentence To Period Already Undergone Citing Medical Condition And Expression Of Remorse Qualification Of '10+2 System' Cannot Be Equated With Other Certifications Absent An Equivalence Clause: Supreme Court Essential Qualifications In Recruitment Cannot Be Diluted Or Subject To Judicial Equivalence: Supreme Court Court Has Discretion To Decide Genuineness Of Signature By Comparison; Not Essential To Invoke Expert Opinion In All Cases: Supreme Court Civil Disputes Cannot Be Converted Into Criminal Offences To Recover Money: Supreme Court Quashes FIR Under Section 420 IPC Taxing Authorities Must Classify Goods Based On Form At Time Of Sale, Not End Use: Supreme Court Suit For Declaration Of Status Must Seek Consequential Relief To Avoid Bar Of Proviso: Allahabad High Court Illegal Detention | Police Failure To Maintain CCTV Footage Invokes Adverse Presumption Under Sec 119 BSA Against State: Allahabad High Court Section 138 NI Act | Accused Rebuts Presumption By Proving Intimation Of Misplaced Cheque To Bank And Lack Of Documentation For Alleged Settlement: Andhra Pradesh High Court Garnishee Proceedings Under CPC | Disputed Debt Cannot Be Summarily Adjudicated Without Leading Evidence: Bombay High Court Criminal Procedure (Identification) Act 2022 | Magistrate’s Power Under Section 5 To Direct DNA Profiling Is Not Conditional Upon Consent: Calcutta High Court Conviction Based On 'Assumption And Presumption' Cannot Be Sustained: Bombay High Court Acquits Husband Limitation Act | Suit For Specific Performance Must Be Filed Within Reasonable Time Even If No Date For Performance Is Fixed: Delhi High Court Enrolment As Advocate | Bar Council Must Consider 'Equivalent Qualifications' Under Rule 4(a) Rules Of Legal Education: Karnataka High Court Section 482 BNSS | Pre-Arrest Bail Is Not A Matter Of Course; Must Show Special Case For Invoking Extraordinary Jurisdiction: Kerala High Court Hindu Succession Act | A Co-parcener Cannot Alienate Entire Property; Non-Impleaded Legal Heir Not Bound By Previous Decree: Madras High Court Purchaser During Pendency Of Suit Bound By Compromise Decree, Cannot Treat It As Void In Collateral Proceedings: Punjab & Haryana High Court Order 23 Rule 1-A CPC | In Partition Suits, Defendants Asserting A Share Can Seek Transposition If Original Plaintiffs Withdraw: Patna High Court Section 69 BNS | Suppression Of Subsisting Marriage Or Live-In Relationship During Marriage Proposal Constitutes 'Deceitful Means': Kerala High Court Anticipatory Bail | Mere Apprehension Of Investigating Agency Is Insufficient To Deny Bail Without Demonstrating Necessity Of Custodial Interrogation: Telangana High Court Income Tax Evasion | Criminal Prosecution Under Section 276C IT Act Cannot Sustain Once Foundation Assessment Order Is Set Aside: Punjab & Haryana High Court

Appellate Courts Must Uphold Duty of Care in Appeals Against Acquittal -Supreme Court

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


In a significant ruling, the Supreme Court of India underscored the importance of the duty of appellate courts in appeals against acquittal. The judgment, delivered by a bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Sanjay Karol, emphasized the need for meticulous scrutiny of evidence and adherence to established principles.

The case in question involved the conviction of individuals under Part I of Section 304 and Section 324 of the Indian Penal Code, read with Section 149. The appellants had previously been acquitted by the Trial Court, but the High Court overturned this decision, leading to an appeal to the Supreme Court.

The key takeaway from the judgment lies in the Court's observation regarding the role of the Appellate Court. The judgment states, "Appellate Jurisdiction – Duty of the Appellate Court in appeals against acquittal – Re-appreciation of evidence – Possibility of the Trial Court's view – High Court's failure to record reasons and findings – Appellate Court's duty to consider the reliability of prosecution witnesses and their demeanour."

In essence, the Appellate Court's responsibility is not merely to assess whether the Trial Court's view is correct or incorrect but to determine whether the Trial Court's view is a possible one based on the evidence at hand. This principle is pivotal when dealing with appeals against acquittals.

Furthermore, the judgment highlighted the significance of considering the demeanour of witnesses in the context of reliability. It noted that Trial Courts often have the advantage of closely observing witnesses during their testimony, which adds depth to their assessment of witness credibility.

The case also raised concerns about the investigation process, specifically regarding a grievous injury suffered by one of the accused. The judgment pointed out a serious lacuna in the prosecution's case due to the failure to investigate this injury thoroughly.

Supreme Court set aside the impugned High Court judgment and emphasized that the Trial Court's conclusions were possible based on the available evidence. As a result, the appellants were directed to be set at liberty unless detained in connection with another case.

Date of Decision: September 26, 2023

D. SUNDARA & ORS. vs STATE OF KARNATAKA       

[gview file="https://lawyer-e-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/26-Sep-2023_H.K.MARIYAPPA_Vs_State.pdf"]

Latest Legal News