Case Note & Summary
The appellant, Mariyammal, the sister of the deceased, filed a criminal appeal under Section 374(3) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, challenging the judgment of acquittal dated 10.10.2018 passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupattur, Vellore District in SC.No.201 of 2017. The trial court had acquitted the respondents 2 and 3 (accused 1 and 2) for offences under Sections 120(B), 302, 302 read with 201, and 302 read with 109 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860. The case of the prosecution was that the deceased was murdered by his wife (A1) and her paramour (A2) by administering poison. The appellant alleged that the trial court erred in acquitting the accused despite sufficient evidence. The High Court examined the evidence, including the testimonies of PW1 (the appellant), PW2 (son of the deceased), and PW3 (daughter of the deceased). The court noted that there was a delay of over two months in lodging the FIR, and the witnesses made contradictory statements. The trial court had found the prosecution witnesses unreliable and the evidence insufficient to prove guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The High Court held that the trial court's findings were not perverse and that the appeal lacked merit. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the acquittal of the accused was upheld.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Appeal Against Acquittal - Section 374(3) CrPC - Scope of Interference - The appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the findings are perverse or based on no evidence. The presumption of innocence is strengthened by acquittal. (Paras 1-10) B) Indian Penal Code - Murder - Section 302 IPC - Circumstantial Evidence - Prosecution failed to prove chain of circumstances leading to guilt. Delay in lodging FIR, lack of credible witnesses, and absence of motive rendered the case weak. (Paras 2-10) C) Evidence Act - Appreciation of Evidence - Credibility of Witnesses - PW1 and PW2 were found unreliable due to contradictions and improvements. The trial court's assessment of evidence was not perverse. (Paras 5-10)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the judgment of acquittal passed by the trial court is perverse and liable to be set aside in an appeal against acquittal under Section 374(3) CrPC.
Final Decision
The appeal is dismissed. The judgment of acquittal dated 10.10.2018 passed by the learned III Additional District and Sessions Judge, Tirupattur, Vellore District in SC.No.201 of 2017 is confirmed.
Law Points
- Appeal against acquittal
- presumption of innocence
- standard of proof beyond reasonable doubt
- appreciation of evidence
- credibility of witnesses
- delay in lodging FIR
- motive
- circumstantial evidence
- Section 374(3) CrPC
- Section 235(1) CrPC
