Himachal Pradesh High Court
Reserved On : 19Th November vs Mahinder Pratap & Others on 31 December, 2025
Author: Virender Singh
Bench: Virender Singh
1 2025:HHC:46510
IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH AT SHIMLA
Criminal Appeal No. : 369 of 2009
Reserved on : 19th November, 2025
.
Decided on : 31st December, 2025
Sarla Devi ......Appellant
Versus
Mahinder Pratap & Others ......Respondents
Coram:
of
The Hon'ble Mr. Justice Virender Singh, Judge.
Whether approved for reporting?1 Yes.
For the appellant rt : Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate
with Mr. Tarun K. Brakta, Advocate.
For the respondents : Mr. Lakshay Thakur, Advocate.
Virender Singh, Judge
Appellant Sarla Devi has preferred the present appeal, under Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code (hereinafter referred to as 'CrPC'), against the judgment of acquittal dated 22.01.2009, passed by the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Court No.2 Palampur, District Kangra, H.P. (hereinafter referred to as 'trial Court'), in Criminal Case No.4II/2006, titled as Sarla Devi versus Mahinder Pratap & Others, arising out of a complaint registered, under Sections 500 and 506 of the Indian Penal Code (hereinafter referred to as the 'IPC') read with Section 34 of the IPC.
1Whether reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment?
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS2 2025:HHC:46510
2. Vide judgment dated 22.01.2009, the learned trial Court has acquitted the respondents, for the offences .
punishable, under Sections 500 and 506 IPC, read with Section 34 IPC.
3. For the sake of convenience, the parties to the present lis, are referred to, in the same manner, as were referred of to, by the learned trial Court.
4. Brief facts, leading to the filing of the present appeal, rt before this Court, as borne out from the record, may be summed up, as under: 4.1. Complainant Sarla Devi has filed a complaint, under Sections 500, 506 read with Section 34 of the IPC, against the respondent disclosing therein that she, along with her child, is residing in village Kandhera, as her husband is working in a private sector in Uttrakhand.
4.2. According to the complainant, she, as well as, her family members are being harassed by some persons and they used to threaten her, upon which, a complaint was made by her on 15.08.2004 and by her husband on 06.09.2004, to Deputy Commissioner, Kangra.
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS3 2025:HHC:46510 4.3. For inquiring the matter, on 10.12.2004, the officials of Revenue Department were to visit the spot and the .
complainant, as well as, the persons, against whom, the complaint was made, were informed, in this regard.
4.4. Since, the complainant was living alone at home, as such, she had called her brotherinlaw Bishan Dass to her of home, so that, he could interact with the revenue officials.
Thereafter, at about 3.00 p.m., when the officials have returned rt back, accused persons, after hatching criminal conspiracy, started abusing her and stated that neither they, nor other villagers had encroached upon the Government land and why she had made a complaint to the Deputy Commissioner and why the revenue officials came to the spot. When the other persons were abusing the complainant, then, Bishan Dass, also reached there, who had tried to intervene.
4.5. On hearing abuses Jhonfi Ram and Uttam Chand also reached there. Jhonfi Ram also tried to pacify the accused persons, as, they were quarreling with a women, upon which, they got furious and accused No.1, pointing towards the complainant, had uttered the words, 'Tu Jhonfi Ram ke sath fasi hui hai or tum dono Badmashiyan karte ko'.
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS4 2025:HHC:46510 Thereafter, accused No.2, also stated that 'Mahinder tum thik bol rahe ho ki Sarla Devi Jhonfi Ram ke sath fasi hui hai'.
.
4.6. It is the further case of the complainant that she saved herself with great difficulty and while leaving the spot, accused persons threatened to eliminate her, as well as, her family members. Thereafter, on 28.12.2024, accused No.3, also of made a comment against the complainant, when she was returning back from fair price shop, by saying that she is a rt characterless lady. At that time, Ashok Kumar was present on the spot.
4.7. The complainant also apprised the whole facts to her husband, upon which, her husband prevailed upon her by saying that in case, they beg pardon, then, it's ok, otherwise, immediately file the case in the Court.
4.8. Thereafter, the complainant made a complaint to the Panchayat, but, the Panchayat authorities refused to accept the complaint, upon which, she made the complaint to the Police.
5. Thereafter, the accused appeared before the Police and again abused the complainant, upon which, the police prepared Kalandra under Sections 107, 150 and 145 Cr.PC.
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS5 2025:HHC:46510
6. It is her further case that due to the comments made by the accused, now, she is being looked suspiciously by the .
villagers and not only this,her children are facing wrath of the villagers, as, the other children have started teasing them.
7. Lastly, the complainant has got recorded that since 27.6.2005, when, the accused persons have returned back from of the Court of Sub Divisional Magistrate, they are threatening to kill her and said that they will call the meeting in the village and rt rusticate them from the society.
8. On the basis of the above facts, she has prayed that action be taken against the accused persons.
9. After filing the complaint, the learned trial Court found a prima case against the accused persons, as such, they were ordered to be summoned. After securing their presence, precharge evidence was recorded.
10. Thereafter, on the basis of precharge evidence, the charges were framed under Sections 504 and 506 IPC, read with Section 34 IPC, against the accused persons, for which, they pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. Thereafter, the accused persons have further crossexamined the CWs.
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS6 2025:HHC:46510
11. Thereafter, the statements of the accused was recorded under Section 313 Cr.PC.
.
12. After hearing learned counsel for the complainant, and the accused persons, the learned trial Court has acquitted the accused persons from the charges, framed against them, vide judgment, which is being assailed before this Court.
of
13. The said judgment of acquittal has been assailed by way of the present appeal, before this Court, mainly, on the rt ground that the learned trial Court has not properly appreciated the evidence, on record and the judgment of acquittal does not stand, in the judicial scrutiny, by this Court. The judgment of acquittal is also stated to unsustainable in the eyes of law, as the same is based upon flimsy and irrational grounds.
14. The judgment of acquittal has further been assailed on the ground that the learned trial Court has failed to appreciate that the accused persons are guilty of casting grave aspersions on the character and integrity of the complainant, who is a lady, and had, by their defamatory acts, tarnished the image of the complainant, in the eyes of general public.
Evidence of CW1 to CW5, is stated to be unrebutted, which is sufficient to bring home the charges against the accused.
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS7 2025:HHC:46510
15. On the basis of the above grounds, Mr. Ajay Sharma, Senior Advocate, assisted by Mr. Tarun Brakta, Advocate, has .
prayed that the appeal may kindly be accepted and the accused may kindly be convicted for the offences, for which, they have been chargesheeted.
16. Per contra, Mr. Lakshay Thakur, Advocate, has of opposed the arguments of learned Senior counsel appearing for the appellant, on the ground that the learned trial Court has rt appreciated the evidence, in the proper perspective, as the complainant has failed to prove the ingredients of the offence, for which, the accused have been chargesheeted, in the present case.
17. The appellant is before this Court against the judgment of acquittal. It is no longer res integra that while deciding the appeal against acquittal, in the absence of perversity in the judgment, interference by this Court, is not warranted.
18. Hon'ble Supreme Court, in Mrinal Das & others vs. State of Tripura, (2011) 9 Supreme Court Cases 479, has laid down parameters, in which, interference can be made in a ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 8 2025:HHC:46510 judgment of acquittal. Relevant paragraphs 13 and 14, of the said judgment, are reproduced, as under:
.
"13. It is clear that in an appeal against acquittal in the absence of perversity in the judgment and order, interference by this Court exercising its extraordinary jurisdiction, is not warranted. However, if the appeal is heard by an appellate court, being the final court of fact, is fully competent to reappreciate, reconsider and review the evidence and take its own decision. In of other words, law does not prescribe any limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and the appellate court is free to arrive at its own conclusion keeping in mind that acquittal provides for rt presumption in favour of the accused. The presumption of innocence is available to the person and in criminal jurisprudence every person is presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by the competent court. If two reasonable views are possible on the basis of the evidence on record, the appellate court should not disturb the findings of acquittal.
14. There is no limitation on the part of the appellate court to review the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is found and to come to its own conclusion. The appellate court can also review the conclusion arrived at by the trial Court with respect to both facts and law. While dealing with the appeal against acquittal preferred by the State, it is the duty of the appellate court to marshal the entire evidence on record and only by giving cogent and adequate reasons set aside the judgment of acquittal. An order of acquittal is to be interfered with only when there are "compelling and substantial reasons", for doing so. If the order is "clearly unreasonable", it is a compelling reason for interference. When the trial Court has ignored the evidence or misread the material evidence or has ignored material documents like dying declaration/report of ballistic experts etc., the appellate court is competent to reverse the ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS
9 2025:HHC:46510 decision of the trial Court depending on the materials placed."
19. Judging the facts and circumstances of the present .
case, in the light of the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Mrinal Das's case supra, this Court has to examine whether the findings recorded by the learned trial Court falls within the of definition of 'perverse findings' or not.
20. In order to decide this Court, it would be just and rt appropriate to discuss the evidence so adduced by the complainant before the learned trial Court.
21. After framing the charges, complainant Sarla Devi appeared in the witnessbox as CW1 and deposed that her husband is working in private Sector and she, along with her children, is residing in her native place. She has further deposed that at the relevant time, she has made a complaint against certain villagers to Deputy Commissioner.
22. This witness has also deposed that in order to verify the allegations of the said complaint, revenue officials visited the spot on 10.12.2004. At about 03.00 p.m., when those officials were inquiring the matter, then Mohinder Pratap and Pratap Chand came there and started abusing her. At that time, Kishan Dass was already present there and Uttam Chand ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 10 2025:HHC:46510 and Jhonfi Ram also came there. Jhonfi Ram has asked Mohinder Pratap not to quarrel with her and also advised them .
that when her husband comes back, then, discuss the matter with him. Thereafter, Mohinder Pratap made a sign towards this witness and stated that she has illicit relations with Jhonfi ram and both were living in adultery.
of
23. This witness has also deposed that not only this, Mohinder Pratap has allegedly commented about their illicit rt relations, upon which, Pratap Chand also supported Mohinder Pratap in affirmative, by saying that whatsoever he has uttered, is correct and threatened the complainant to kill her. On 28.12.2004, accused Vipan also made similar allegations by saying that she is a characterless lady. When the complainant disclosed this matter to her husband, he has advised her that the matter pertains to their village, as such, she has to move a complaint to the Panchayat first and if the accused do not admit their guilt, then, to file case against them. Thereafter, efforts were made to move a complaint to Panchayat, however, her complaint was not accepted by the Panchayat. Thereafter, the complaint was made to the Police, upon which, the police has ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 11 2025:HHC:46510 initiated the proceedings under Sections 107 and 150 of the Cr.PC.
.
24. This witness has also deposed that thereafter, the above persons again uttered those words, due to which, her children stopped attending the school. After attending the Court of SDM, the accused persons allegedly threatened her of that whosoever will maintain contact with her, he will be boycotted. According to her, one Ashok had called her to have rt meal on the occasion of Shradh, then the accused persons have boycotted him.
25. In the crossexamination, this witness has deposed that when the revenue officials visited the spot, then 1520 persons had gathered there, however, those officials have not submitted the report. She has named few of them, who were present there as Sukh Ram, Sita, Kashmir, Mohan etc. She has admitted that the complaint to police was moved after 1520 days of the incident. She has also admitted that police has lodged the complaint about the quarrel, however, they had not taken any action qua the abusive language used by the accused.
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS12 2025:HHC:46510
26. This witness has admitted that she is having civil litigation with Pratap Chand, but denied that she was not .
having cordial relations with Mohinder Pratap. When the accused person allegedly used abusive language, those were not heard by Sita, Sukh Ram and Mohan, as they were not present there at that time. No one, out of 1520 persons, had heard the of abusive language, as, no one was present there, at that time.
She has further admitted that the proceedings under Sections rt 107 and 150 were initiated after 1520 days. Lastly, she has denied the suggestion that the complaint was lodged after six months and eighteen days.
27. In her further crossexamination conducted on 20.02.2007, this witness has admitted that Pratap Chand, Suresh Chand and Brikam Chand are her neighbours. She has feigned ignorance about the khasra number, which was subject matter of the inquiry by the revenue official. Voluntarily stated that she has made a complaint to the Deputy Commissioner as, whenever, she used to graze her cow, the accused persons used to abuse her.
28. CW2 Uttam Chand, has deposed that on 10.12.2004, at about 3.00 p.m., he was on his way to cut the ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 13 2025:HHC:46510 grass, then he noticed that Mohinder Pratap and Pratap Chand were abusing Sarla. On the spot, Bishan Dass and Jhonfi Ram .
were present. Jhonfi Ram has said to Mohinder Pratap not to raise quarrel with the complainant, upon which, Mohinder Pratap uttered the words to Sarla Devi that she is having illicit relations with Jhonfi Ram and Pratap Chand has also of acknowledged the said allegations, by saying that whatsoever deposed by Pratap Chand is correct.
rt
29. In the crossexamination, this witness has denied the suggestions that 1520 persons were also present there.
According to him, only 5 persons were there. Rest, he has denied all the suggestions.
30. In further crossexamination conducted on 20.02.2007, this witness has admitted that the alleged incident was witnessed by 1520 persons, however, he was not in a position to disclose the name of those persons.
31. CW3 Bishan Dass, has deposed that on 10.12.2004, at about 3.00 p.m., Mohinder Pratap and Pratap Chand, started abusing Sarla, upon which, Jhonfi requested them not to raise quarrel with her, as, her husband is not present there and also advised them that when her husband will come back, then, ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 14 2025:HHC:46510 discuss the matter with him. Thereafter, Mohinder Pratap become furious and uttered the words Sarla Devi is having illicit .
relations with Jhonfi Ram and Pratap Chand has also uttered that whatsoever alleged by Mohinder Pratap is correct. He is brotherinlaw of Sarla Devi and on the day of incident, he had gone there by chance.
of
32. CW4 Jhonfi Ram, has deposed that on 10.12.2004, at about 3.00 p.m., he was coming back from his land, then rt Sarla Devi and Bishan Dass were present in the courtyard.
Mohinder Pratap and Pratap Chand were quarrelling with Sarla Devi. On seeing this witness, the complainant made a grievance before him by saying that uncle, they are unnecessarily raising quarrel with her, upon which, this witness has advised them as to why they are quarreling with a lady and advised them that when her husband comes back, then talk to him. Thereafter, Mohinder Pratap has uttered that complainant is having illicit relations with this witness and Pratap Chand has acknowledged the fact that she is a lady of easy virtue. He has also deposed that his statement was recorded by the Police.
33. In the crossexamination, this witness has admitted that no demarcation was conducted by the revenue officials, in ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 15 2025:HHC:46510 his presence. He has denied that on 5.02.2005, he has made a statement to the police that at the time of demarcation, he was .
present there. He has further admitted that at the time of alleged demarcation, he was not present there.
34. CW5, Ashok Kumar has deposed that on 28.12.2004, he had gone to Bairghata, along with Vipan. Sarla of Devi was on her way to her home from fair price shop. Accused Vipan Kumar has uttered that look the characterless lady is coming.
rt When Sarla Devi had inquired, Vipan Kumar has threatened her that he has seen many persons like her. On the occasion of Shradh of his father, he has called the entire villagers. Sarla Devi was also called. Thereafter, accused Vipan said that in case, he will call Sarla Devi, then they will not come. Thereafter, accused persons had stopped inviting this witness to their functions. This witness has admitted that he has not made any statement to police and Panchayat, with regard to the fact that the accused persons have misbehaved with the complainant.
35. In the defence, the accused persons have examined Saroj Sharma, the then Pradhan, Gram Panchayat Balmuria.
According to her, on the complaint of Saroj Devi, demarcation ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 16 2025:HHC:46510 was conducted by revenue officials on 12.10.2004. At that time, Sarla Devi, accused Mohinder Pratap Singh, Sita Ram, were .
present. Demarcation was started on 11.30 a.m., which was concluded by 3.003.30 p.m., however, Sarla Devi, left the spot at 3.30 p.m. On the spot, along with the officials of revenue department, this witness, Mahender Pratap Singh, Sita Ram of and other persons were present. They remained on the spot till 4.30 p.m. She has further deposed that between 3.00 p.m. to rt 4.30 p.m., accused No.1 and 2 had not uttered any abusive words against Sarla Devi. Sarla Devi, has not made a complaint, regarding the quarrel, nor, the complaint was made on 31.01.2005. She has denied the suggestion that on 15.08.2004, Sarla Devi has made a complaint Mark 'Z', against the villagers.
36. The complainant is before this Court, against the judgment of acquittal. The scope of the powers of the Appellate Court, in an appeal, against acquittal, has elaborately been discussed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in a case, titled as Sadhu Saran Singh versus State of Uttar Pradesh and others, reported in (2016) 4 Supreme Court Cases 357.
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS17 2025:HHC:46510 Relevant paras20 to 22, of the judgment, are reproduced, as under:
.
"20. Generally, an appeal against acquittal has always been altogether on a different pedestal from that of an appeal against conviction. In an appeal against acquittal where the presumption of innocence in favour of the accused is reinforced, the appellate court would interfere with the order of acquittal only when there is perversity of fact and law. However, we believe that the paramount of consideration of the Court is to do substantial justice and avoid miscarriage of justice which can arise by acquitting the accused who is guilty of an offence. A miscarriage of justice that may occur by rt the acquittal of the guilty is no less than from the conviction of an innocent. This Court, while enunciating the principles with regard to the scope of powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, in Sambasivan v. State of Kerala, (1998) 5 SCC 412, has held: (SCC p. 415, para 7) "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." (emphasis supplied)
21. This Court, in several cases, has taken the consistent view that the appellate court, while dealing with an appeal against acquittal, has no absolute restriction in law to review and relook the ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 18 2025:HHC:46510 entire evidence on which the order of acquittal is founded. If the appellate court, on scrutiny, finds that the decision of the court below is based on erroneous views and against settled position of .
law, then the interference of the appellate court with such an order is imperative.
22. This Court in Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka,(2007) 4 SCC 415 : (2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 325, after referring to a catena of decisions, has laid down the following general principles with regard to powers of the appellate court while of dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal: (SCC p. 432, para 42) "42. From the above decisions, in our rt considered view, the following general principles regarding powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:
(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
(2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 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 ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 19 2025:HHC:46510 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.
of Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.
rt (5) 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."
(self emphasis supplied)
37. Even otherwise, in a recent decision in Criminal Appeal No. 355 of 2013, titled as Constable 907 Surendra Singh & Anr. versus State of Uttarakhand, Neutral Citation No. 2025 INSC 114, the Hon'ble Supreme Court, has again reiterated the powers of the Appellate court, while deciding an appeal, against the judgment of acquittal. Relevant paras8 to 12 of the judgment, are reproduced, as under:
8. It is further submitted that the interference in the judgment of acquittal by the learned trial judge would have been warranted by the High Court only in the event the view taken by the learned trial judge was found to be perverse or impossible. It is submitted that ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 20 2025:HHC:46510 no perversity or impossibility could be noticed in the view taken by the learned trial judge and as such the interference by the High Court in an appeal against the acquittal was totally unwarranted.
.
9. As against this, the learned counsel for the respondent. State submits that the Division Bench of the High Court has given sound reasons for reversing the order of acquittal and as such no interference is warranted in the present appeals.
10. We have perused the entire material on record of with the assistance of the learned counsel for the parties.
11. Recently, in the case of Babu Sahebagouda rt Rudragoudar and others v. State of Karnataka, (2024) 8 SCC 149, a Bench of this Court to which one of us was a Member (B.R. Gavai, J.) had an occasion to consider the legal position with regard to the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal. It was observed thus:
"38. First of all, we would like to reiterate the principles laid down by this Court governing the scope of interference by the High Court in an appeal filed by the State for challenging acquittal of the accused recorded by the trial court.
39. This Court in Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar Rajesh Prasad v. State of Bihar, (2022) 3 SCC 471: (2022) 2 SCC (Cri) 31) encapsulated the legal position covering the field after considering various earlier judgments and held as below:
(SCC pp. 48283, para 29) "29. After referring to a catena of judgments, this Court culled out the following general principles regarding the powers of the appellate court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal in the following words: (Chandrappa case [Chandrappa v. State of Karnataka, (2007) 4 SCC 415: (2007) 2 SCC (Cri) 325), SCC P. 432, para 42) ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 21 2025:HHC:46510 '42. From the above decisions, in our considered view, the following principles general regarding powers of the appellate .
court while dealing with an appeal against an order of acquittal emerge:
(1) An appellate court has full power to review, reappreciate and reconsider the evidence upon which the order of acquittal is founded.
of (2) The Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 puts no limitation, restriction or condition on exercise of such power and an appellate court on the evidence before it may reach rt 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. an appellate court in an appeal of 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 favour of in the accused. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental of principle criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law.
Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 22 2025:HHC:46510 is further reinforced, strengthened by the trial court. reaffirmed and (5) If two reasonable conclusions are .
possible on the basis of the evidence record, appellate on the court should not disturb the finding of trial acquittal recorded by the court.'"
40. Further, in H.D. Sundara v. State of Sundara v. State of Karnataka [H.D. Karnataka, (2023) 9 SCC 581: (2023) 3 SCC (Cri) 748) this Court summarised of the principles governing the exercise of appellate jurisdiction while dealing with an appeal against acquittal under Section 378 CrPC as follows: (SCC p. 584, para 8) rt "8. ... 8.1. The acquittal of the accused further strengthens the presumption of innocence;
8.2. The appellate court, while hearing an appeal against acquittal, is entitled to reappreciate the oral and documentary evidence;
8.3. The appellate court, while deciding an appeal against acquittal, after reappreciating the evidence, is required to consider whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view which could have been taken on the basis of the evidence on record;
8.4. If the view taken is a possible view, the appellate court cannot overturn the order of acquittal on the ground that another view was also possible; and 8.5. The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible."
41. Thus, it is beyond the pale of doubt that the scope of interference by an appellate court for reversing the ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 23 2025:HHC:46510 judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles:
.
41.1. That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity;
41.2. That the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record; and 41.3. That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the of accused is possible from the evidence available on record."
12. It could thus be seen that it is a settled legal position that the interference with the finding of rt acquittal recorded by the learned trial judge would be warranted by the High Court only if the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity; that the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record; and that no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record."
(self emphasis supplied)
38. Being guided by the above decision, this Court would proceed further to determine as to whether the findings, so recorded by the learned trial Court, while acquitting the accused, suffers from perversity.
39. The term "perverse" has duly been elaborated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in 'Arulvelu and Another Versus State represented by the Public Prosecutor and Another', reported in (2009) 10 Supreme Court Cases 206. Relevant ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 24 2025:HHC:46510 paragraphs 22 to 30 of the said judgment are reproduced, as under: .
"22. We have carefully perused the judgment of the trial court and the impugned judgment of the High Court. The trial court very minutely examined the entire evidence and all documents and exhibits on record. The trial court's analysis of evidence also seems to be correct. The trial court has not deviated from the normal norms or methods of evaluation of the evidence. By no stretch of imagination, we can hold of that the judgment of the trial court is based on no evidence or evidence which is thoroughly unreliable and no reasonable person would act upon it and consequently the judgment of the trial court is rt perverse.
23. We also fail to arrive at the conclusion that the discussion and appreciation of the evidence of the trial court is so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice of irrationality incurring the blame of being perverse and the findings rendered by the trial court are against the weight of evidence. The law is well settled that, in an appeal against acquittal, unless the judgment of the trial court is perverse, the Appellate Court would not be justified in substituting its own view and reverse the judgment of acquittal.
24. The expression `perverse' has been dealt with in number of cases. In Gaya Din (Dead) through LRs. & Others v. Hanuman Prasad (Dead) through LRs. & Others, this Court observed that the expression `perverse' means that the findings of the subordinate authority are not supported by the evidence brought on record or they are against the law or suffer from the vice of procedural irregularity.
25. In Parry's (Calcutta) Employees' Union v. Parry & Co. Ltd. & Others, the Court observed that `perverse finding' means a finding which is not only against the weight of evidence but is altogether against the evidence itself. In Triveni Rubber & Plastics v. Collector of Central Excise, Cochin, the Court observed ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS
25 2025:HHC:46510 that this is not a case where it can be said that the findings of the authorities are based on no evidence or that they are so perverse that no reasonable person would have arrived at those findings.
.
26. In M. S. Narayanagouda v. Girijamma & Another, the Court observed that any order made in conscious violation of pleading and law is a perverse order. In Moffett v. Gough, the Court observed that a perverse verdict may probably be defined as one that is not only against the weight of evidence but is altogether against the evidence. In Godfrey v. Godfrey, the Court of defined `perverse' as turned the wrong way, not right; distorted from the right; turned away or deviating from what is right, proper, correct etc. rt
27. The expression "perverse" has been defined by various dictionaries in the following manner:
1. Oxford Advanced Learner's Dictionary of Current English Sixth Edition Perverse: Showing deliberate determination to behave in a way that most people think is wrong, unacceptable or unreasonable.
2. Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English
-
International Edition Perverse: Deliberately departing from what is normal and reasonable.
3. The New Oxford Dictionary of English 1998 Edition Perverse: Law (of a verdict) against the weight of evidence or the direction of the judge on a point of law.
4. New Webster's Dictionary of the English Language (Deluxe Encyclopedic Edition) Perverse: Purposely deviating from accepted or expected behavior or opinion; wicked or wayward; stubborn; cross or petulant.
5. Stroud's Judicial Dictionary of Words & Phrases, Fourth Edition ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 26 2025:HHC:46510 Perverse: A perverse verdict may probably be defined as one that is not only against the weight of evidence but is altogether against the evidence.
.
28. In Shailendra Pratap & Another v. State of U.P., the Court observed thus:
"8. ... We are of the opinion that the trial court was quite justified in acquitting the appellants of the charges as the view taken by it was reasonable one and the order of acquittal cannot of be said to be perverse. It is well settled that appellate court would not be justified in interfering with the order of acquittal unless the same is found to be perverse. In the present rt case, the High Court has committed an error in interfering with the order of acquittal of the appellants recorded by the trial court as the same did not suffer from the vice of perversity."
29. In Kuldeep Singh v. The Commissioner of Police & Others, the Court while dealing with the scope of Articles 32 and 226 of the Constitution observed as under:
"9. Normally the High Court and this Court would not interfere with the findings of fact recorded at the domestic enquiry but if the finding of "guilt" is based on no evidence, it would be a perverse finding and would be amenable to judicial scrutiny.
10. A broad distinction has, therefore, to be maintained between the decisions which are perverse and those which are not. If a decision is arrived at on no evidence or evidence which is thoroughly unreliable and no reasonable person would act upon it, the order would be perverse. But if there is some evidence on record which is acceptable and which could be relied upon, howsoever compendious it may be, the conclusions would not be treated as perverse and the findings would not be interfered with."::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS
27 2025:HHC:46510
30. The meaning of `perverse' has been examined in H. B. Gandhi, Excise and Taxation Officercum Assessing Authority, Karnal & Others v. Gopi Nath & .
Sons & Others 1992, this Court observed as under:
"7. In the present case, the stage at and the points on which the challenge to the assessment in judicial review was raised and entertained was not appropriate. In our opinion, the High Court was in error in constituting itself into a court of appeal against the assessment. While it of was open to the respondent to have raised and for the High Court to have considered whether the denial of relief under the proviso to Section 39(5) was proper or not, it was not open to the rt High Court reappreciate the primary or perceptive facts which were otherwise within the domain of the factfinding authority under the statute. The question whether the transactions were or were not sales exigible to sales tax constituted an exercise in recording secondary or inferential facts based on primary facts found by the statutory authorities. But what was assailed in review was, in substance, the correctness as distinguished from the legal permissibility of the primary or perceptive facts themselves. It is, no doubt, true that if a finding of fact is arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant material or if the finding so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice of irrationality incurring the blame of being perverse, then, the finding is rendered infirm in law."
40. Similar view has again been taken by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in S.R. Tewari Versus Union of India and Another, reported in (2013) 6 Supreme Court Cases 602.
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS28 2025:HHC:46510 Relevant paragraph 30 of the said judgment is reproduced, as under: .
"30. The findings of fact recorded by a court can be held to be perverse if the findings have been arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant/inadmissible material. The finding may also be said to be perverse if it is "against the weight of evidence", or if the finding so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice of irrationality. If a decision is arrived at on of the basis of no evidence or thoroughly unreliable evidence and no reasonable person would act upon it, the order would be perverse. But if there is some evidence on record which is acceptable and which rt could be relied upon, the conclusions would not be treated as perverse and the findings would not be interfered with. (Vide: Rajinder Kumar Kindra v. Delhi Administration, Kuldeep Singh v. Commissioner of Police & Ors., Gamini Bala Koteswara Rao & Ors. v. State of Andhra Pradesh thr. Secretary and Babu v. State of Kerala)."
(self emphasis supplied)
41. Being guided by the above provisions, now, this Court would proceed further to discuss the evidence, so adduced before the learned trial Court.
42. As per the case set up by the complainant, the alleged incident had taken place on 10.12.2004 and the complaint before the Court was filed on 28.06.2005, after a period of six months and eighteen days. The complainant had made a futile attempt to explain the delay, by adding paragraph 10, in the complaint, by stating that when accused No.2 and 3, ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 29 2025:HHC:46510 on 27.06.2005, after attending the Court proceedings, before the SDM, were returning back, then they had given the .
threatening to kill her and on the same day, at about 6.00 p.m., they had allegedly threatened the complainant to call a meeting in the village and get her rusticated from the society.
43. Learned counsel appearing for the complainant of could not satisfy the judicial conscience of this Court as to what is the relevance and connection of the facts mentioned, in para rt 10, which had allegedly taken place on 27.06.2005, with that of the alleged incidents, which had taken place on 10.12.2024, as well as, on 28.12.2024. To the considered opinion of this Court, the same is nothing but futile attempt to explain the delay.
44. The complainant allegedly made a complaint to incharge Police Post, Thural, on 31.01.2005, that too, after about one month, from the alleged incident. Even, in this complaint, Mark 'Z', the allegations have been levelled about the alleged incident, which had taken place on 28.12.2004, when, one Vipan Kumar son of Shri Milap Chand, brother of accused No.3, had allegedly used abusive language against her. It seems that those allegations have been levelled to explain the delay by enlarging the scope of complaint. Vipan Kumar, admittedly was ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 30 2025:HHC:46510 not present even, according to the case of the complainant, on 10.12.2004.
.
45. The delay in the criminal matter is fatal, if not explained, as, the prompt lodging of FIR rules out deliberations.
Whenever a person is approaching the Court, he is duty bound to explain the delay to the judicial satisfaction of the Court.
of
46. On one hand, the complainant has alleged that she has made complaint against some persons of the village on rt 15.08.2004 and her husband also made a complaint on 06.09.2004, however, in the said complaint, Mark 'X', allegations are only against Amin Chand son of Shri Piar Chand, who has not been impleaded, as accused in the present complaint.
47. In addition to this, the complainant has also made the allegations against Sukh Ram son of Shri Nihala, Mohan Singh son of Shri Shankar, Jagat Ram son of Buta Ram, Sukhan Devi widow of Makholi Ram, Rakesh Kumar son of Shera, Surender Kumar son of Sher Singh Him Raj son of Moti Ram, Vipan Kumar son of Milap Chand, Sira Ram son of Gorakh, Kashmir Singh son of Daya Ram and Anjna Devi wife of Himraj, by alleging that they are in unauthorized possession of ::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS 31 2025:HHC:46510 Shamlat land and unnecessarily harassing the complainant and her children, whereas, she has not alleged anything against .
them in the complaint filed before the Court. Meaning thereby, the complainant is more interested to conceal the facts than assailing the same, in judicial scrutiny, before the learned trial Court.
of
48. The learned trial Court, in the present case, has elaborately discussed the evidence and to the considered rt opinion of this Court, the conclusion, which has been drawn by the learned trial Court, is legally possible, from the evidence, so adduced, as, even the police, on the basis of the complaint made to it, by the complainant, initiated the proceedings under Sections 107, 150 and 145 of the Cr.PC. Moreover, the findings recorded by the learned trial Court does not fall within the definition of 'perverse findings'.
49. Hence, no ground for interference with the well reasoned judgment of the learned trial Court is made out and the same is upheld. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. The personal and surety bonds furnished by the accused, are discharged.
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS32 2025:HHC:46510
50. The accused persons are directed to furnish the bail bond in the sum of Rs.50,000/ each with one surety of the like .
amount under the provisions of Section 437A Cr.P.C to the satisfaction of learned Registrar (Judicial) of this Court within a period of seven days, by giving an undertaking to appear before the Hon'ble Apex Court, in case, this judgment is being assailed of before the Apex Court.
51. Record be sent back.
rt (Virender Singh)
December 31, 2025 (ps) Judge
::: Downloaded on - 05/01/2026 20:31:07 :::CIS