Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 735 (1.35 seconds)
Documents citing Arulvelu & Anr vs State Rep By Public Prosecutor & Anr on 7 October, 2009

Reserved On: 19.08.2025 vs Yogesh Kumar & Another on 28 August, 2025

High Court has set aside the judgment of the trial court without pointing out any perversity therein. The said case of Arulvelu [Arulvelum v. State, (2009) 10 SCC 206 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] related to the offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. Therein, on the scope of the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, this Court observed as follows : (SCC p. 221, para 36) "36. Careful scrutiny of all these judgments leads to the definite conclusion that the appellate court should be very slow in setting aside a judgment of acquittal, particularly in a case where two views are possible. The trial court judgment r cannot be set aside because the appellate court's view is more probable. The appellate court would not be justified in setting aside the trial court judgment unless it arrives at a clear finding on marshalling the entire evidence on record that the judgment of the trial court is either perverse or wholly unsustainable in law."
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 44 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Indranil Mondal vs Birla Corporation Limited on 13 January, 2023

The said case of Arulvelu [Arulvelu v. State, (2009) 10 SCC 206 : (2010) 1 8 SCC (Cri) 288] related to the offences under Sections 304-B and 498- A IPC. Therein, on the scope of the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, this Court observed as follows : (SCC p. 221, para 36) "36. Careful scrutiny of all these judgments leads to the definite conclusion that the appellate court should be very slow in setting aside a judgment of acquittal particularly in a case where two views are possible. The trial court judgment cannot be set aside because the appellate court's view is more probable. The appellate court would not be justified in setting aside the trial court judgment unless it arrives at a clear finding on marshalling the entire evidence on record that the judgment of the trial court is either perverse or wholly unsustainable in law."
Calcutta High Court (Appellete Side) Cites 11 - Cited by 0 - T Ghosh - Full Document

Shyam Sunder Sharma vs State Of U.P. And 2 Others on 8 July, 2022

40. In exceptional cases where there are compelling circumstances, and the judgment under appeal is found to be perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal. 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 material or by taking into consideration irrelevant/inadmissible material. A 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. (See Balak Ram v. State of U.P.9, Shailendra Pratap v. State of U.P.10, Budh Singh v. State of U.P.11, S. Rama Krishna v. S. Rami Reddy¹2, Arulvelu v. State 13, Ram Singh v. State of H.P.14 and Babu v. State of Kerala¹5.))"
Allahabad High Court Cites 66 - Cited by 0 - V K Birla - Full Document

Arun Narula - Proprietor Of Parul ... vs Electromech Industrial Corporation & ... on 27 June, 2025

(2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] because the High Court has set aside the judgment of the trial court without pointing out any perversity therein. The said case of Arulvelu [Arulvelu v. State, (2009) 10 SCC 206 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] related to the offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. Therein, on the scope of the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, this Court observed as follows : (SCC p. 221, para 36) "36. Careful scrutiny of all these judgments leads to the definite conclusion that the appellate court should be very slow in setting aside a judgment of acquittal particularly in a case where two views are possible. The trial court judgment cannot be set aside because the appellate court's view ismore probable. The appellate court would not be justified in setting aside the trial court judgment unless it arrives at a clear finding on marshalling the entire evidence on record that the judgment of the trial court is either perverse or wholly unsustainable in law."
Delhi High Court Cites 16 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Dalel Singh Patial vs Sarwans Kaur Chopra on 4 July, 2025

The said case of Arulvelu [Arulvelum v. State, (2009) 10 SCC 206 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] related to the offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. Therein, on the scope of the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, this Court observed as follows : (SCC p. 221, para 36) "36. Careful scrutiny of all these judgments leads to the definite conclusion that the appellate court should be very slow in setting aside a judgment of acquittal, particularly in a case where two views are possible. The trial court judgment cannot be set aside because the appellate court's view is more probable. The appellate court would not be justified in setting aside the trial court judgment unless it arrives at a clear finding on marshalling the entire evidence on record that the ::: Downloaded on - 04/07/2025 21:31:37 :::CIS P a g e | 45 Neutral Citation No. ( 2025:HHC:21187 ) judgment of the trial court is either perverse or wholly unsustainable in law."
Himachal Pradesh High Court Cites 53 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Shri Ashok Gaur vs State Of Nct Of Delhi & Anr on 3 July, 2025

(2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] because the High Court has set aside the judgment of the trial court without pointing out any perversity therein. The said case of Arulvelu [Arulvelu v. State, (2009) 10 SCC 206 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] related to the offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. Therein, on the scope of the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, this Court observed as follows : (SCC p. 221, para 36) "36. Careful scrutiny of all these judgments leads to the definite conclusion that the appellate court should be very slow in setting aside a judgment of acquittal particularly in a case where two views are possible. The trial court judgment cannot be set aside because the appellate court's view ismore probable. The appellate court would not be justified in setting aside the trial court judgment unless it arrives at a clear finding on marshalling the entire evidence on record that the judgment of the trial court is either perverse or wholly unsustainable in law."
Delhi High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Gopal Gupta vs Inderjeet on 24 December, 2024

(2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] because the High Court has set aside the judgment of the trial court without pointing out any perversity therein. The said case of Arulvelu [Arulvelu v. State, (2009) 10 SCC 206 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] related to the offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. Therein, on the scope of the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, this Court observed as follows : (SCC p. 221, para 36) "36. Careful scrutiny of all these judgments leads to the definite conclusion that the appellate court should be very slow in setting aside a judgment of acquittal particularly in a case where two views are possible. The trial court judgment cannot be set aside because the appellate court's view ismore probable. The appellate court would not be justified in setting aside the trial court judgment unless it arrives at a clear finding on marshalling the entire evidence on record that the judgment of the trial court is either perverse or wholly unsustainable in law."
Delhi High Court Cites 14 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Manoj Kumar Panchal vs Mahender Kumar Panchal on 28 May, 2025

(2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] because the High Court has set aside the judgment of the trial court without pointing out any perversity therein. The said case of Arulvelu [Arulvelu v. State, (2009) 10 SCC 206 : (2010) 1 SCC (Cri) 288] related to the offences under Sections 304-B and 498-A IPC. Therein, on the scope of the powers of the appellate court in an appeal against acquittal, this Court observed as follows : (SCC p. 221, para 36) "36. Careful scrutiny of all these judgments leads to the definite conclusion that the appellate court should be very slow in setting aside a judgment of acquittal particularly in a case where two views are possible. The trial court judgment cannot be set aside because the appellate court's view ismore probable. The appellate court would not be justified in setting aside the trial court judgment unless it arrives at a clear finding on marshalling the entire evidence on record that the judgment of the trial court is either perverse or wholly unsustainable in law."
Delhi High Court Cites 15 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

State Of Up vs Rajendra S/O Chunni Lal And 03 Others on 6 July, 2022

40. In exceptional cases where there are compelling circumstances, and the judgment under appeal is found to be perverse, the appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal. 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 material or by taking into consideration irrelevant/inadmissible material. A 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. (See Balak Ram v. State of U.P.9, Shailendra Pratap v. State of U.P.10, Budh Singh v. State of U.P.11, S. Rama Krishna v. S. Rami Reddy¹2, Arulvelu v. State 13, Ram Singh v. State of H.P.14 and Babu v. State of Kerala¹5.)"
Allahabad High Court Cites 76 - Cited by 0 - V K Birla - Full Document
1   2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next