Case Note & Summary
The State of Maharashtra filed an appeal against the judgment and order of the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Nanded, dated 22 December 1995, acquitting three brothers—Maheboob Khan, Faruq Khan, and Rashid Khan—for the offence punishable under Section 302 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The case pertained to the death of Yadav, brother of the complainant Keshav Chavan, in village Sangvi on the night of 12 June 1995. The prosecution alleged that a dispute over Rs.200 deposited by Vatchalabai with the accused's mother led to a chain of events culminating in the fatal beating of Yadav by the three accused near Pralhad's hotel. Faruq allegedly assaulted Yadav with an iron chain, causing injuries including testicular trauma, which resulted in his death. The trial court, after recording evidence, found that the prosecution witnesses turned hostile and that the evidence was contradictory and insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt, and acquitted the accused. In appeal, the State contended that eye-witnesses Pralhad, Gayabai, Baba, Vithal, Vatchalabai, and Madhav had admitted seeing the accused assault the deceased, and that the medical evidence corroborated the cause of death. The defence argued that these witnesses were inconsistent, suffered from material contradictions, and did not actually witness the assault. The High Court carefully considered the submissions and held that the trial court had taken a plausible view of the evidence; since the view was not perverse, no interference was called for in an appeal against acquittal. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Law - Appeal Against Acquittal - Appellate Court Interference - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 378 - The trial court acquitted the accused as prosecution witnesses turned hostile and evidence was contradictory. The High Court, on State appeal, held that where the trial court's view is plausible and not perverse, the appellate court will not interfere even if another view is possible. Accordingly, the appeal was dismissed, confirming acquittal. (Paras 1-6)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the acquittal by the trial court was perverse or manifestly erroneous, warranting interference by the appellate court.
Final Decision
Appeal dismissed. Acquittal upheld. Court found trial court's view plausible as prosecution witnesses turned hostile, evidence was contradictory and did not prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Law Points
- acquittal upheld as trial court took plausible view based on evidence
- witnesses turned hostile
- no interference warranted
