Read Time: 04 minutes
Top court discussed the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal, while holding that a court's decision can only be interfered with if it is found to be impossible or perverse.
Noting that the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal is very limited, the Supreme Court has recently held that unless, it is found that the view taken by the Court is impossible or perverse, it is not permissible to interfere with the finding of acquittal.
"Equally if two views are possible, it is not permissible to set aside an order of acquittal, merely because the appellate court finds the way of conviction to be more probable. The interference would be warranted only if the view taken is not possible at all", a bench of Justices BR Gavai and PS Narasimha has held.
Court made this observation while dismissing an appeal filed by the State of Rajasthan challenging the High Court's decision to reverse the judgment passed by District and Sessions Judge, Jodhpur convicting one Kistoora Ram under section 302 of the IPC and sentencing him to undergo life imprisonment.
It was alleged that Ram had killed his wife with a lathi, dragged her 100 feet away from the house and set her on fire in order to destroy the evidence.
Top Court found that the high court had elaborately discussed the evidence and trial court itself had disbelieved the alleged recovery of the incriminating material at the instance of the accused.
Referring to an extra-judicial confession allegedly made by a witness, the high court was found to have rightly held that extrajudicial confession was a weak piece of evidence and unless there was some corroboration, the conviction solely on the basis of extrajudicial confession could not be sustained.
Holding the view of the High Court not to be either impossible or perverse, the Top Court dismissed the appeal.
Case Title: STATE OF RAJASTHAN vs. KISTOORA RAM
Please Login or Register
