2010 (10) TMI 300 - HC - Central Excise

Duty evasion - Clandestine production - it is a settled principle that while exercising appellate power even if two reasonable conclusions are possible on the basis of the evidence on record the appellate court should not disturb the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial court - It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeal the appellate court is not required to re-write the judgment or to give fresh reasonings when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper - the prosecution has failed to prove its case beyond reasonable doubt - Even in the present appeal nothing is produced or pointed out to rebut the conclusion of the trial Court - ultimate conclusion and the resultant order of acquittal recorded by the court below and hence find no reasons to interfere with the same - Appeal is dismissed by way of remand to the trial court

Summary

Issues:
Appeal against acquittal under Section 378 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 challenging judgment of acquittal under Central Excise and Salt Act.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Background and Allegations:
The case involved a partnership firm accused of evading excise duty on processed synthetic cloth. The prosecution alleged that the firm processed cloth clandestinely, evaded excise duty, and committed offenses under the Central Excise and Salt Act. The trial initiated against the accused resulted in acquittal by the trial court.

2. Contentions and Arguments:
The appellant, dissatisfied with the trial court's judgment, contended that the evidence proved the charges against the respondent beyond reasonable doubt. The appellant's advocate argued that the trial court erred in its evaluation of evidence and legal provisions.

3. Legal Principles Governing Appeals Against Acquittals:
The High Court referred to several legal precedents emphasizing that in appeals against acquittals, the appellate court should not interfere unless the lower court's decision is manifestly illegal or perverse. The court highlighted the principles that guide appellate courts in reviewing evidence and respecting the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused.

4. Judicial Review and Dismissal of Appeal:
After a thorough review of the trial court's judgment, evidence, and legal provisions, the High Court found no grounds to interfere with the acquittal. The court noted that the prosecution failed to prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, and the appellant's arguments did not establish any manifest illegality or perversity in the trial court's decision. Consequently, the High Court upheld the trial court's acquittal and dismissed the appeal.

5. Conclusion:
The High Court affirmed the trial court's findings as just and proper, concluding that no legal infirmity existed in the acquittal order. The court dismissed the appeal, upholding the trial court's decision and canceling any existing bail bonds. The case was remanded back to the trial court promptly.

In summary, the High Court, following established legal principles, upheld the trial court's acquittal in a case involving allegations of excise duty evasion, emphasizing the importance of proving charges beyond reasonable doubt and respecting the presumption of innocence in favor of the accused.