The acquittal cannot be set aside by the HC, if view of the trial court is a plausible one; SC.

Supreme Court of India

Justice Hemant Gupta, Justice U U Lalit & Justice Indu Malhotra

The SC {SHRI SATISH KUMAR & ANR v. THE STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH & ANR.} holds that the trial court has recorded an order of acquittal - such order of acquittal could be interfered with only if there was perversity in the findings recorded by the trial court. It was held that mere fact that the High Court has a different opinion will not be sufficient to enable the High Court to set aside the order of acquittal. 

It was held that the High Court interfered with the findings of acquittal even though the conclusion drawn by the trial court is a possible conclusion on the basis of evidence on record. The SC held that the prosecution has failed to prove the role of accused in causing death of the deceased Ratti Ram inasmuch as the recovery of dead body in pursuance of similar disclosure statements made by accused Satish Kumar and Rajeev Kumar is not proved. Further held, in the absence of any evidence led by the prosecution as to who fired the fatal shot, the benefit of doubt must go to the accused persons and was rightly granted by the learned trial court.

It was held by the SC that the order of the High Court convicting the appellants is wholly illegal, unwarranted and unjust. The conviction of the appellants for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and Sections 25 and 27 of the Act was set aside by the SC. Accordingly, both the appeals were allowed by the SC.

In the present case, the appeal filed by the complainant was allowed and the order of acquittal passed by the learned trial court on 30th November, 2012 was set aside by the HC. The appellants were convicted by the HC for the offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 as well as under Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act, 1959 - said judgment was set aside by the SC.