Case Note & Summary
The present application was filed by the original informant-appellant, who had filed Criminal Appeal No.451 of 2013 challenging the acquittal of the respondents (original accused) in Sessions Case No.192 of 2012 by the learned District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon on 11th September 2013 for offences punishable under Sections 307 read with Section 34, 109 read with Section 307, 201 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act. The informant alleged that on the date of incident, the accused persons attacked him with a knife and other weapons, causing grievous injuries. The trial court, after examining the evidence, acquitted all accused on the ground that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt. The informant, being aggrieved, filed the present application seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal. The High Court, after hearing the parties and perusing the record, found that the trial court's appreciation of evidence was not perverse or unreasonable. The court noted that the informant's testimony contained material contradictions and improvements, and the medical evidence did not corroborate the alleged use of a knife. The court also observed that there was delay in lodging the FIR and the independent witnesses turned hostile. Consequently, the High Court dismissed the application for leave to appeal, holding that no interference was warranted in the acquittal order.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Appeal against acquittal - Section 378 CrPC - Scope of interference - High Court should not interfere with acquittal unless findings are perverse or based on no evidence - Held that trial court's appreciation of evidence was plausible and not unreasonable (Paras 1-3).
B) Indian Penal Code - Attempt to murder - Section 307 IPC - Credibility of injured witness - Injured witness is a reliable witness but contradictions and improvements in testimony can affect credibility - Held that the informant's testimony suffered from material contradictions and improvements, making it unsafe to convict (Paras 4-6).
C) Indian Penal Code - Abetment - Section 109 IPC - No evidence of abetment - Held that in absence of any overt act or instigation, conviction under Section 109 cannot be sustained (Paras 7-8).
D) Indian Arms Act - Section 25 - Possession of weapon - No recovery or evidence of use - Held that acquittal under Arms Act was justified as there was no proof of possession or use of weapon (Paras 9-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court's acquittal of the accused for offences under Sections 307, 109, 201 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act was perverse or erroneous, warranting interference by the High Court.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the Criminal Application No.2019 of 2018, thereby refusing leave to appeal against the acquittal. The court held that the trial court's findings were not perverse and that no interference was warranted.
Law Points
- Appreciation of evidence in acquittal appeals
- Scope of interference under Section 378 CrPC
- Standard of proof in criminal cases
- Credibility of injured witness
- Delay in lodging FIR
Case Details
2023 LawText (BOM) (10) 49
Criminal Application No.2019 of 2018 in Criminal Appeal No.451 of 2013
Smt. Vibha Kankanwadi, Abhay S. Waghwase
Mr. B.R. Waramaa for Applicant, Mr. A.M. Phule, A.P.P. for Respondent No.1 - State, Mr. Rajendrra Deshmukh, Senior Counsel i/b. Mr. Sanket N. Suryawanshi for Respondent Nos. 2 to 6, Mr. N.S. Ghanekar for Respondent No.7 (Absent), Mr. R.O. Awasarmol for Respondent No.8 (Absent)
The State of Maharashtra and Others
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal application for leave to appeal against acquittal
Remedy Sought
The informant-appellant sought leave to appeal against the acquittal of the accused in Sessions Case No.192 of 2012.
Filing Reason
The informant was aggrieved by the acquittal of the accused for offences under Sections 307, 109, 201 IPC and Section 25 of the Arms Act.
Previous Decisions
The trial court (District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon) acquitted the accused on 11th September 2013. The informant's Criminal Appeal No.451 of 2013 was admitted on 29th January 2014. The State also filed Criminal Appeal No.61 of 2014 which was admitted on the same date.
Issues
Whether the trial court's acquittal was perverse or based on erroneous appreciation of evidence?
Whether the High Court should interfere with the acquittal under Section 378 CrPC?
Submissions/Arguments
The informant-appellant argued that the trial court ignored the evidence of the injured witness and the medical evidence, and that the acquittal was against the weight of evidence.
The respondents-accused argued that the trial court correctly appreciated the evidence and that there were contradictions and improvements in the informant's testimony, and that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt.
Ratio Decidendi
The High Court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the findings of the trial court are perverse or based on no evidence. In this case, the trial court's appreciation of evidence was plausible and not unreasonable, and the informant's testimony suffered from material contradictions and improvements, making it unsafe to convict.
Judgment Excerpts
Present Application has been filed by the original informant – appellant, who has filed Criminal Appeal No.451 of 2013 challenging the acquittal of the respondents – original accused in Sessions Case No. 192 of 2012 by the learned District Judge-3 and Additional Sessions Judge, Jalgaon on 11th September 2013 for the offence punishable under Sections 307 read with Section-34, 109 read with Section 307, 201 of the Indian Penal Code and Section 25 of the Indian Arms Act.
The said Criminal Appeal No.451 of 2013 came to be admitted by this Court by order dated 29th January 2014.
Procedural History
The trial court acquitted the accused on 11th September 2013. The informant filed Criminal Appeal No.451 of 2013 which was admitted on 29th January 2014. The State also filed Criminal Appeal No.61 of 2014 which was admitted on the same date. The informant then filed the present Criminal Application No.2019 of 2018 seeking leave to appeal against the acquittal.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 307, 34, 109, 201
- Indian Arms Act, 1959: 25
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 378
