Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 8 of 8 (0.22 seconds)Shivaji Sahebrao Bobade & Anr vs State Of Maharashtra on 27 August, 1973
These aspects were
highlighted by this Court in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade and Anr.
v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1973 SC 2622), Ramesh Babulal
Doshi v. State of Gujarat (1996 (4) Supreme 167), Jaswant
Singh v. State of Haryana (2000 (3) Supreme 320), Raj Kishore
Jha v. State of Bihar and Ors. (2003 (7) Supreme 152), State of
Punjab v. Karnail Singh (2003 (5) Supreme 508, State of
Punjab v. Pohla Singh and Anr. (2003 (7) Supreme 17) and
V.N. Ratheesh v. State of Kerala (2006 (10) SCC 617).
State Of Punjab vs Karnail Singh on 14 August, 2003
These aspects were
highlighted by this Court in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade and Anr.
v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1973 SC 2622), Ramesh Babulal
Doshi v. State of Gujarat (1996 (4) Supreme 167), Jaswant
Singh v. State of Haryana (2000 (3) Supreme 320), Raj Kishore
Jha v. State of Bihar and Ors. (2003 (7) Supreme 152), State of
Punjab v. Karnail Singh (2003 (5) Supreme 508, State of
Punjab v. Pohla Singh and Anr. (2003 (7) Supreme 17) and
V.N. Ratheesh v. State of Kerala (2006 (10) SCC 617).
State Of Punjab vs Pohla Singh And Anr on 22 September, 2003
These aspects were
highlighted by this Court in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade and Anr.
v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1973 SC 2622), Ramesh Babulal
Doshi v. State of Gujarat (1996 (4) Supreme 167), Jaswant
Singh v. State of Haryana (2000 (3) Supreme 320), Raj Kishore
Jha v. State of Bihar and Ors. (2003 (7) Supreme 152), State of
Punjab v. Karnail Singh (2003 (5) Supreme 508, State of
Punjab v. Pohla Singh and Anr. (2003 (7) Supreme 17) and
V.N. Ratheesh v. State of Kerala (2006 (10) SCC 617).
V.N. Ratheesh vs State Of Kerala on 6 July, 2006
These aspects were
highlighted by this Court in Shivaji Sahabrao Bobade and Anr.
v. State of Maharashtra (AIR 1973 SC 2622), Ramesh Babulal
Doshi v. State of Gujarat (1996 (4) Supreme 167), Jaswant
Singh v. State of Haryana (2000 (3) Supreme 320), Raj Kishore
Jha v. State of Bihar and Ors. (2003 (7) Supreme 152), State of
Punjab v. Karnail Singh (2003 (5) Supreme 508, State of
Punjab v. Pohla Singh and Anr. (2003 (7) Supreme 17) and
V.N. Ratheesh v. State of Kerala (2006 (10) SCC 617).
Section 302 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Bhagwan Singh & Ors vs State Of M.P on 23 January, 2003
9. There is no embargo on the appellate Court reviewing the
evidence upon which an order of acquittal is based. Generally,
the order of acquittal shall not be interfered with because the
presumption of innocence of the accused is further
strengthened by acquittal. The golden thread which runs
through the web of administration of justice in criminal cases
is that if two views are possible on the evidence adduced in the
case, one pointing to the guilt of the accused and the other to
his innocence, the view which is favourable to the accused
should be adopted. The paramount consideration of the Court
is to ensure that miscarriage of justice is prevented. A
miscarriage of justice which may arise from acquittal of the
guilty is no less than from the conviction of an innocent. In a
case where admissible evidence is ignored, a duty is cast upon
the appellate Court to re-appreciate the evidence where the
accused has been acquitted, for the purpose of ascertaining as
to whether any of the accused really committed any offence or
not. [See Bhagwan Singh and Ors. v. State of Madhya Pradesh
(2002 (2) Supreme 567)]. The principle to be followed by
appellate Court considering the appeal against the judgment of
acquittal is to interfere only when there are compelling and
substantial reasons for doing so. If the impugned judgment is
clearly unreasonable and relevant and convincing materials
have been unjustifiably eliminated in the process, it is a
compelling reason for interference.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
1