9911796707
TMI Blog2009 (9) TMI 1056X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al filed by the State. The High Court held accused Nos. 1, 2 and 4 guilty for an offence punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 IPC and imposed sentence of life imprisonment and held accused No. 3 guilty for the offence punishable under Section 307 IPC and imposed sentence of five years. It may be pertinent to mention that accused respondent Nos. 2 to 4 died during the pendency of appeal before the High Court. The only surviving appellant herein (who was accused No. 1 before the High Court) has filed the present appeal against the impugned judgment and order of the High Court. 4. The motive for the occurrence as per the prosecution is that P.W.1's sister was living with the appellant and subsequently died six months prior to the occurrence. The other women folk of the house abused the appellant and his relatives. The appellant told the same to Sebastiraj P.W.1. P.W.1 consoled him stating that they were abusing him only because of frustration and everything would be alright after a lapse of time. 5. The appellant and other accused and the deceased belonged to the Burma colony, Thanjavur. Sebastiraj P.W.1 and Karunanidhi P.W.2 were friends of deceased Jambu. On 8.5.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... under Ex.P6 Mahazar. After inquest, he forwarded the body for autopsy. 8. Dr. Vijayalakshmi P.W.8 Tutor in Forensic Medicines, Government Medical College, Thanjavur received the body of the deceased at about 10 a.m. on 9.5.1988 and commenced the postmortem. She found 21 injuries and according to her the cause of death was due to hemorrhage and shock due to injuries received. 9. The appellant herein surrendered before the Judicial Magistrate, Thiruvaiyaru on 17.5.1988. The Investigating Officer P.W.10 after investigation gave the final report implicating the appellant. 10. After the evidence of prosecution was over, the Trial Judge questioned the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. with reference to the incriminating circumstances appearing in evidence against them and they denied the offence. The learned Sessions Judge, considering the evidence recorded both oral and documentary, chose to acquit the accused. 11. The High Court on re-appreciation of the evidence convicted the appellant and other accused. According to the High Court, the learned Sessions Judge has not properly marshaled and evaluated the evidence on record. 12. The relevant findings of the High Court would be dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s that after some time when they were standing outside there was a noise and accused No. 1 instigated other accused to cut (kill) Sebastiraj P.W.1. The sense of time may vary from person to person unless one was able to look at the wrist watch at a given time." 19. The important findings of the High Court are set out as under: I. Merely because P.W.1 turned hostile, it cannot be said that the accused who attempted to commit the murder of P.W.1 should be acquitted. II. There is no specific evidence that the deceased took any food. When the friends have gone to the temple and at temple, some Prasatham or food is provided, unless there is a specific evidence that the deceased took a particular type of food or a particular quantity, it cannot be said that the deceased ought to have taken food. III. This is not a case where death occurred during night time or the dead body was found long after the commission of the crime so that the courts have to depend upon the medical evidence to fix the time of death. 20. There are conflicting judgments of the trial court and the High Court, therefore, we have carefully gone through the entire evidence de novo. The High Court, in our considered ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ppeal under Section 417 Criminal P.C., the High Court has full power to review the evidence upon which the order of acquittal was founded, but it is equally well-settled that the presumption of innocence of the accused was further reinforced by his acquittal by the trial court, and the findings of the trial court which had the advantage of seeing the witnesses and hearing their evidence can be reversed only for very substantial and compelling reasons. 25. This Court reiterated the principles and observed that presumption of innocence of accused is reinforced by an order of the acquittal. The appellate court could have interfered only for very substantial and compelling reasons. 26. In Tulsiram Kanu v. The State AIR 1954 SC 1, this Court explicated that the appellate court would be justified in reversing the acquittal only when very substantial question and compelling reasons are present. In this case, the Court used a different phrase to describe the approach of an appellate court against an order of acquittal. There, the Sessions Court expressed that there was clearly reasonable doubt in respect of the guilt of the accused on the evidence put before it. Kania, C.J., observed tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eals with an appeal against an order of conviction, and so, it is obvious that the High Court's powers in dealing with criminal appeals are equally wide whether the appeal in question is one against acquittal or against conviction. That is one aspect of the question. The other aspect of the question centres round the approach which the High Court adopts in dealing with appeals against orders of acquittal. In dealing with such appeals, the High Court naturally bears in mind the presumption of innocence in favour of an accused person and cannot lose sight of the fact that the said presumption is strengthened by the order of acquittal passed in his favour by the trial Court and so, the fact that the accused person is entitled for the benefit of a reasonable doubt will always be present in the mind of the High Court when it deals with the merits of the case. As an appellate Court the High Court is generally slow in disturbing the finding of fact recorded by the trial Court, particularly when the said finding is based on an appreciation of oral evidence because the trial Court has the advantage of watching the demeanour of the witnesses who have given evidence. Thus, though the powe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mphasis supplied) 31. In Bishan Singh and Ors. v. The State of Punjab (1974) 3 SCC 288, Justice Khanna speaking for the Court provided the legal position: 22. It is well settled that the High Court in appeal under Section 417 of the CrPC has full power to review at large the evidence on which the order of acquittal was founded and to reach the conclusion that upon the evidence the order of acquittal should be reversed. No limitation should be placed upon that power unless is be found expressly stated be in the Code, but in exercising the power conferred by the Code and before reaching its conclusion upon fact the High Court should give proper weight and consideration to such matters as (1) the views of the trial judge as to the credibility of the witnesses; (2) 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; (3) the right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt; & (4) 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. 32. In K. Gopal Reddy v. State of A.P. (1979) 1 SCC 355, the Court observed thus ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the case and the court below has taken a view which is a plausible one, the appellate court cannot legally interfere with an order of acquittal even if it is of the opinion that the view taken by the court below on its consideration of the evidence is erroneous. (emphasis supplied) 34. In Sambasivan and Ors. v. State of Kerala (1998) 5 SCC 412, the Court observed thus: 7. The principles with regard to the scope of the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, are well settled. The powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal are no less than in an appeal against conviction. But where on the basis of evidence on record two views are reasonably possible the appellate court cannot substitute its view in the place of that of the trial court. It is only when the approach of the trial court in acquitting an accused is found to be clearly erroneous in its consideration of evidence on record and in deducing conclusions therefrom that the appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal. 35. In Bhagwan Singh and Ors. v. State of M.P. (2002) 4 SCC 85, the Court repeated one of the fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence that if two ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e judged as a whole having regard to the totality of the evidence. In appreciating the evidence the approach of the court must be integrated not truncated or isolated. In other words, the impact of the evidence in totality on the prosecution case or innocence of the accused has to be kept in mind in coming to the conclusion as to the guilt or otherwise of the accused. In reaching a conclusion about the guilt of the accused, the court has to appreciate, analyse and assess the evidence placed before it by the yardstick of probabilities, its intrinsic value and the animus of witnesses. It must be added that ultimately and finally the decision in every case depends upon the facts of each case. 12. Doubtless the High Court in appeal either against an order of acquittal or conviction as a court of first appeal has full power to review the evidence to reach its own independent conclusion. However, it will not interfere with an order of acquittal lightly or merely because one other view is possible, because with the passing of an order of acquittal presumption of innocence in favour of the accused gets reinforced and strengthened. The High Court would not be justified to interfere with th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded. (2) The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach its own conclusion, both on questions of fact and of law. (3) Various expressions, such as, "substantial and compelling reasons", "good and sufficient grounds", "very strong circumstances", "distorted conclusions", "glaring mistakes", etc. are not intended to curtail extensive powers of an appellate court in an appeal against acquittal. Such phraseologies are more in the nature of "flourishes of language" to emphasise the reluctance of an appellate court to interfere with acquittal than to curtail the power of the court to review the evidence and to come to its own conclusion. (4) An appellate court, however, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, there is double presumption in favour of the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Second ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
