- The Hon’ble High Court of Bombay, in the case of State Of Maharshtra v Gulab Dattu Patil &Ors, held that an appellate court’s inclination to re-evaluate and re-eppreciate evidence on record for the purpose of taking an alternate view is not justified when the Trial Court’s view is also possible and not unreasonable. It observed that a caution must be exercised before making changed to the factual findings recorded by the Lower Courts.
- Brief facts are that a GITR was registered with the Mumbai Police by one Sri Krishna Mane who found a dead body in a bad shape in his field. The daughter of the deceased was married to one of the Respondents and had initiated litigation against the respondent and his family for ill-treating her. She was also attending gearings in this regard along with her father. The Respondents connived to murder the deceased.
- The Prosecution submitted that the present case was that of a criminal conspiracy wherein one of the Respondents, on the pretext of locating an underground water source, took the deceased to a secluded area and smashed his head. Thereafter, he took off the clothes and left the body naked to evade evidence.
- No defence witness was produced and after hearing arguments from both sides, the Trial Court acquitted all Respondents.
- The question before the Hon’ble High Court was whether an appellate court could interfere with the order High Court especially in cases of order of acquittal.
- The Court held that in cases of Trial Court’s acquittal, the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused becomes more stronger and the accused is entitled to benefit of reasonable doubt. It also remarked that despite the appellate court’s extensive powers in appeals against conviction, the same cannot be exercised in appeals against acquittal because the trial court sees the demeanor of witnesses and if it takes a reasonable view, interference by an appellate court is unjustified.
- The Court placed reliance on earlier Supreme Court judgments in the case of inMurlidhar @Gidda v State of Karnataka,Surajpal Singh v State,Tulsiram Kanu v State,Madan Mohan Singh vState of UP,Atley vState of UP,Aher Raja Khima vState of Saurashtra,Balbir Singh v State of Punjab,KheduMohton v State of Bihar and Chandrappa vState of Karnataka, among others.
- Given the above, the Court, dismissing the appeal, held that it would not interfere with the judgment of the Trial Court.
"Loved reading this piece by Megha?
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
Join LAWyersClubIndia's network for daily News Updates, Judgment Summaries, Articles, Forum Threads, Online Law Courses, and MUCH MORE!!"
