Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.41 seconds)The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Section 304B in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 306 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 34 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 386 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Murlidhar Rao S/O Manik Rao vs The State Of Karnataka on 2 March, 2012
12. The Apex Court in many other judgments including
Murlidhar Vs. State of Karnataka2 has held that unless, the conclusions
reached by the trial court are found to be palpably wrong or based on
erroneous view of the law or if such conclusions are allowed to stand,
they are likely to result in grave injustice, Appellate Court should not
interfere with the conclusions of the Trial Court. Apex Court also held
that merely because the appellate court on re-appreciation and re-
evaluation of the evidence is inclined to take a different view,
interference with the judgment of acquittal is not justified if the view
taken by the trial court is a possible view.
The Indian Evidence Act, 1872
Section 378 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Ghurey Lal vs State Of U.P on 30 July, 2008
11. The Apex Court in Ghurey Lal Vs. State of U.P.1 has culled
out the factors to be kept in mind by the Appellate Court while hearing
an appeal against acquittal. Paragraph Nos.72 and 73 of the said
judgment read as under:
1