Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra appealed against the acquittal of five accused persons who were charged under Sections 147, 148, 307 read with 149 and 34 IPC. The incident occurred on 9.11.1987 at about 5 pm when the victims, Shilika, Sudam, Usha, and Balu, were returning home and were allegedly attacked by the accused. The trial court acquitted all accused, finding material contradictions in the prosecution evidence, particularly regarding the time of the incident and the identification of the accused. The High Court, in appeal, examined the evidence and found that the trial court's view was plausible and not perverse. The witnesses gave inconsistent statements about the time (some said 5 pm, others said 6 pm or after sunset), and the identification of the accused was doubtful due to darkness. Moreover, the injuries were simple and not on vital parts, and the prosecution failed to prove common intention. The High Court held that the acquittal did not warrant interference and dismissed the appeal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appeal against acquittal - Section 378 CrPC - Scope of interference - High Court can interfere only if the trial court's view is perverse or unreasonable, not merely because a different view is possible - Held that the trial court's appreciation of evidence was plausible and not perverse, hence acquittal upheld (Paras 1-10).
B) Evidence - Identification - Doubtful identification due to darkness and contradictions - Prosecution witnesses gave inconsistent versions regarding time and visibility - Held that such contradictions create reasonable doubt (Paras 5-8).
C) Criminal Law - Attempt to murder - Sections 307, 147, 148, 149 IPC - Common intention - Prosecution failed to prove that the accused shared common intention to commit murder - Injuries were simple and not on vital parts - Held that the offence under Section 307 was not made out (Paras 6-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal of the accused by the trial court was perverse or unreasonable, warranting interference by the High Court in appeal.
Final Decision
The High Court dismissed the appeal and upheld the acquittal of all five accused.
Law Points
- Acquittal cannot be interfered with unless perverse or unreasonable
- Benefit of doubt
- Appreciation of evidence in criminal appeal against acquittal
- Section 378 CrPC
Case Details
2005 LawText (BOM) (07) 82
Criminal Appeal No.425 of 1989
Smt.Ranjana Desai, D.B.Bhosale
Smt A.S.Pai (APP for appellant), Ms Sawita Suryawanshi (appointed for respondents)
Ramdas Kisan Yerande, Govind Kisan Yerande, Sou.Nakabai Kisan Yerande, Sou. Savitribai Shankar Kale, Dagadu Bhagu Gopale
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against acquittal
Remedy Sought
State sought conviction of the accused for offences under Sections 147, 148, 307 read with 149 and 34 IPC
Filing Reason
The trial court acquitted all five accused, and the State challenged the acquittal as perverse and unreasonable.
Previous Decisions
The Additional Sessions Judge, Pune, acquitted all accused in Sessions Case No.44 of 1988 on 27th March, 1989.
Issues
Whether the trial court's acquittal was perverse or unreasonable?
Whether the prosecution proved the guilt of the accused beyond reasonable doubt?
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant (State) argued that the trial court erred in acquitting the accused despite sufficient evidence.
The respondents (accused) were absent and their appointed advocate did not appear.
Ratio Decidendi
In an appeal against acquittal, the High Court can interfere only if the trial court's view is perverse or unreasonable. The trial court's appreciation of evidence, which found material contradictions and doubtful identification, was plausible and not perverse. Hence, the acquittal was upheld.
Judgment Excerpts
This appeal is directed against the Judgment and order dated 27th March, 1989 passed by the learned Addl.Sessions Judge, Pune in Sessions Case No.44 of 1988, by which all the five accused, who were charged and tried for the offences punishable under sections 147,148 and 307 read with section 149 and under section 307 read with section 34 of IPC, have been acquitted.
The prosecution case, sans unnecessary details, is that all the accused and the victims are, inter-se, related and have their agricultural lands adjacent to each others.
Procedural History
The trial court (Additional Sessions Judge, Pune) acquitted all five accused on 27th March, 1989. The State of Maharashtra appealed to the High Court of Judicature at Bombay, which heard the appeal and dismissed it on 8th July, 2005.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 147, 148, 307, 149, 34
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 378
