TMI Blog2002 (8) TMI 866X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... finding that the prosecution had not proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. The appeal preferred by the State against the acquittal of the appellants was dismissed by the High Court by its order dated 22nd November, 1994. No doubt the appeal was dismissed on the ground of limitation. A revision was preferred by the informant to the High Court under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure which has been allowed by the impugned judgment and order dated 6th June, 2001 in Criminal Revision No. 48 of 1994. The judgment of acquittal was set aside and the case was remitted to the Sessions Judge for re-trial in accordance with law. From the evidence on record it appears that an occurrence took place on 20th July, 1989 at about 4.0 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng been dismissed, a criminal revision was filed by the informant, PW.4 under Section 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the High Court. In the revision before the High Court it was sought to be urged on behalf of the informant that there was no reason to discard the testimony of PWs. 1, 3 4. The medical evidence on record corroborated their testimony. Therefore, on the basis of the evidence on record, it should have been held that the prosecution had proved its case beyond reasonable doubt. On the other hand it was high-lighted by the appellants that the trial court had recorded its reasons for their acquittal. In the First Information Report a clear allegation was made against appellant No.1 of having assaulted Kumud (de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mony. Rejecting the argument urged on behalf of the appellants that there was no mention in the First Information Report about the presence of the wife and the daughter of the informant as eye witnesses who witnessed the occurrence from the balcony, the learned Judge observed that it was not expected that every detail would be mentioned in the First Information Report. On such reasoning, the High Court set aside the order of acquittal and ordered re-trial of the appellants. We have carefully considered the material on record and we are satisfied that the High Court was not justified in re-appreciating the evidence on record and coming to a different conclusion in a revision preferred by the informant under Section 401 of the Code of Crim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... acquittal by a private party. (See AIR 1951 SC 196 : D. Stephens vs. Nosibolla; AIR 1962 SC 1788 : K.C. Reddy vs. State of Andhra Pradesh; (1973) 2 SCC 583 : Akalu Ahir and others vs. Ramdeo Ram; AIR 1975 SC 1854 : Pakalapati Narayana Gajapathi Raju and others vs. Bonapalli Peda Appadu and another and AIR 1968 SC 707 : Mahendra Pratap Singh vs. Sarju Singh). The instant case is not one where any such illegality was committed by the trial court. In the absence of any legal infirmity either in the procedure or in the conduct of the trial, there was no justification for the High Court to interfere in exercise of its revisional jurisdiction. It has repeatedly been held that the High Court should not re-appreciate the evidence to reach a find ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sight of that when a re-trial is ordered, the dice is heavily loaded against the accused, and that itself must caution the Court exercising revisional jurisdiction. We, therefore, find no justification for the impugned order of the High Court ordering re-trial of the appellants. The High Court has noticed the fact that the State had preferred an appeal against the acquittal of the appellants. That appeal was dismissed by the High Court on the ground of limitation. In principle that makes no difference, because the dismissal of the appeal even on the ground of limitation is a dismissal for all purposes. As observed earlier, the jurisdiction of the High Court in dealing with an appeal against acquittal preferred under Section 374 of the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
