The Hon’ble SC held that the High Court has
erred in overturning the decision of the acquittal. While considering an appeal
against acquittal, the principles laid down in Sheo Swarup and Ors v. The King
Emperor, AIR 1934 PC 227(2), which were approved by this Court in Bhubneshwar
Mandal & Ors. V. The State of Bihar (CRL A No. 257 of 1969 decided on 06.12.1972)
and again reiterated in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Samman Dass (1972 INSC 11), shall
be given proper consideration. The para (3) of the Bhubneshwar Mandal (supra)
as under:
“3. It appears to us that the learned Judges of the
High Court have ignored very important points in the evidence in the case and
allowed the appeal against acquittal and convicted the present appellants. It is
not necessary to set out at great length the various decisions regarding the
powers of the High Court in an appeal against acquittal. The classic statement
is found in the decision of the Privy Council in Sheo Swarup v. King Emperor to
the following effect:
- the views of the trial Judge as to the credibility of the witnesses;
- the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused, a presumption certainly not weakened by the fact that he has been acquitted at his trial;
- the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt; and
- the slowness of an appellate Court in disturbing a finding of fact arrived at by a Judge who had the advantage of seeing the witnesses.”
The
court also said that mere harassment by itself could not be treated to be
cruelty. In our view, the High Court was in error in reversing the
acquittal of the appellant without coming to a finding that the view taken by
the Sessions Court in favour of the appellant was either perverse or was
impossible in view of the evidence on record.
It is likely that there may have been some disputes
or discord in the matrimonial life of the appellant and the victim. That, however,
would not be sufficient in itself to attract the provisions of Section 306 read
with Section 107 of the Penal Code. In fact, there is no evidence, whatsoever,
to indicate any act of abetment by the appellant. Hence, The SC set aside the
decision of the High Court and maintained the order of acquittal of the
appellant.
Legal Citation: Sanjay Kumar v. State
of Himachal Pradesh (2026 INSC 948)
Comments