TMI Blog2008 (9) TMI 953X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cases. A revisional Court cannot convert itself into a regular Court of Appeal. Powers of revisional Court are thus limited. Rejection of a revision application, therefore, cannot affect the power of the State in invoking statutory remedy available u/s 378 of the Code. The preliminary objection has, therefore, no force and is hereby rejected. So far as an application for leave to appeal by the State is concerned, the High Court rejected it without considering the evidence of the prosecution. In the impugned order, the High Court noted that it had heard the learned Assistant Public Prosecutor. It went on to state that none of the injuries sustained by the victim was `fatal'. According to the High Court, the cause behind the assault was that the complainant-advocate was teasing the wife of the accused, who was also working in the Court. In Sita Ram Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh [ 1979 (1) TMI 236 - SUPREME COURT] , this Court held that a single right of appeal is more or less a universal requirement of the guarantee of life and liberty rooted in the concept that men are fallible, judges are men and making assurance doubly sure, before irrevocable deprivation of life ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gment, was not right in rejecting the application for leave on the ground that the judgment of the trial Court could not be termed as `perverse'. They do not curtail the authority of the appellate Court in interfering with an order of acquittal recorded by the trial Court. The order of the High Court, therefore, cannot stand and must be set aside. Therefore, the appeal deserves to be allowed and is allowed accordingly by remitting the matter to the High Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law. - C.K. THAKKER AND DEVINDER KUMAR JAIN, JJ. For the Appellant : Madhavi Divan and Ravindra Keshavrao Adsure, Advs. For the Respondent : J.P. Dhanda, Raj Rani Dhanda, Vineet Dhanda, K.P. Singh, M.S. Hussain and Amrendra Kumar Singh, Advs. JUDGMENT C.K. THAKKER, J. 1. Leave granted. 2. The present appeal is filed against the order passed by the High Court of Judicature at Bombay on June 12, 2007 in Criminal Application No. 1390 of 2007. By the said order, the High Court refused to grant leave to appeal to the State against an order of acquittal recorded by III Ad hoc Addl. Sessions Judge, Palghar on January 16, 2007 in Sessions Case No. 148 of 200 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be tried. 6. The prosecution in order to establish the case against the accused, examined 15 witnesses. It mainly relied upon testimony of PW1-Rajan (complainant and victim) and PW2- Charushila (real sister of complainant). Deposition of PW12-Dr. D'Souza was recorded to prove injuries sustained by the victim. After the prosecution evidence, statement of the accused was recorded under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as `the Code') wherein he admitted his presence on the Railway platform on the date of occurrence. He, however, denied to have committed any offence. 7. The learned trial Judge, vide his judgment and order dated January 16, 2007, acquitted the accused for the offences with which he was charged. According to the learned Judge, the prosecution failed to establish the case against the accused beyond reasonable doubt. 8. The State, being aggrieved by the order of acquittal, filed an application, being Criminal Application No. 1390 of 2007 for leave to appeal in the High Court. The High Court, vide the impugned order dated June 12, 2007, rejected the application observing that the judgment of the trial Court co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as also taken by the Bar Council. According to the High Court, the judgment of the trial Court could not be said to be `perverse'. It accordingly dismissed the application. It was submitted that keeping in view all these facts, the present appeal deserves to be allowed by remitting the matter to the High Court for fresh disposal in accordance with law. 13. The learned Counsel for the accused, on the other hand, supported the order passed by the High Court. In the counter-affidavit, it was said that there was suppression of fact by the State. It was stated that being aggrieved by the order passed by the trial Court acquitting the accused, the complainant filed a revision which was registered as Criminal Revision Application No. 166 of 2007 and a Single Judge of the High Court, vide order dated July 18, 2006, dismissed it. The State was joined as party. The Assistant Public Prosecutor also appeared for the State and the High Court refused to interfere with the order. The fact of filing revision by the complainant and dismissal thereof has not been mentioned in the present proceedings. On this ground alone, the appeal deserves to be dismissed. 14. Even on merits, the counsel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court to set aside a finding of acquittal in revision and it is only in exceptional cases that this power should be exercised. It is not possible to lay down the criteria for determining such exceptional cases which would cover all contingencies. We may however indicate some cases of this kind, which would in our opinion justify the High Court in interfering with a finding of acquittal in revision. These cases may be : where the trial court has no jurisdiction to try the case but has still acquitted the accused, or where the trial court has wrongly shut out evidence which the prosecution wished of produce, or where the appeal court has wrongly held evidence which was admitted by the trial court to be inadmissible, or where material evidence has been overlooked either by the trial court or by the appeal court, or where the acquittal is based on a compounding of the offence, which is invalid under the law. These and other cases of similar nature can properly be held to be cases of exceptional nature, where the High Court can justifiably interfere with an order of acquittal; and in such a case it is obvious that it cannot be said that the High Court was doing indirectly what it c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... an abstract proposition of law of universal application that each and every petition seeking leave to prefer an appeal against an order of acquittal recorded by a trial Court must be allowed by the appellate Court and every appeal must be admitted and decided on merits. But it also cannot be overlooked that at that stage, the Court would not enter into minute details of the prosecution evidence and refuse leave observing that the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Court could not be said to be `perverse' and, hence, no leave should be granted. 24. In Sita Ram and Ors. v. State of Uttar Pradesh 1979CriLJ659 , this Court held that a single right of appeal is more or less a universal requirement of the guarantee of life and liberty rooted in the concept that men are fallible, judges are men and making assurance doubly sure, before irrevocable deprivation of life or liberty comes to pass, a full-scale re- examination of the facts and the law is made an integral part of fundamental fairness or procedure. 25. We are aware and mindful that the above observations were made in connection with an appeal at the instance of the accused. But the principle underlying the abov ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... atil-PW-15 show that Rajan Mukund Patil sustained bleeding injuries. 31. PW12-Dr. D'souza, Medical Officer of KEM Hospital, Mumbai stated that he had examined victim PW1-Rajan on June 8, 2003 at 4.00 a.m. in the early morning and found following four injuries. 1. C.L.W. right shoulder 3 x 1 x 1 cm anterior aspect, caused by sharp object, age within 24 hrs, nature simple. 2. C.L.W. on 1 x 3 x 6 cms in epigastria (upper part of abdomen) caused by sharp object, grievous injury. 3. C.L.W. 1 x 0.5 x 0.5 cm, left axilla i.e. left arm pit caused by sharp object, injury is simple. 4. C.L.W. 5 x 1 x 1 cm left flank (left side of abdomen) caused by sharp object, grievous. 32. He issued necessary certificate which is at Ext. 34. According to him, injuries could be caused by sharp cutting instrument like knife. Though initially he stated that injuries 2 and 4 were grievous and fatal in nature, thereafter he stated that they were not fatal but could become fatal. The Court also noted that the circumstantial evidence supported the contention of the complainant that he sustained bleeding injuries. Bloodstains were found on the shirt and pant of accused which was of Group `A& ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ce. Both questions of fact and of law are open to determination by the appellate Court. 37. It is no doubt true that in a case of acquittal, there is a double presumption in favour of the respondent-accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person should be presumed innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced by the trial Court (and certainly not weakened). Nonetheless, it is not correct to say that unless the appellate Court in an appeal against acquittal under challenge is convinced that the finding of acquittal recorded by the trial Court is `perverse', it cannot interfere. If the appellate Court on re-appreciation of evidence and keeping in view well established principles, comes to a contrary conclusion and records conviction, such conviction cannot be said to be contrary to law. 38. Recently, in Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka 2007CriLJ2136 , after considering all leading decisions on the point, one of us (C.K. Thakker, J.) laid down the following ge ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
