Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 24 (0.38 seconds)Section 366 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
Section 363 in The Indian Penal Code, 1860 [Entire Act]
State Of Uttar Pradesh vs Ram Veer Singh And Ors on 5 September, 2007
12. Similar principle has been laid down by the Apex Court in cases of State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ram Veer Singh and others, 2007 A.I.R. S.C.W. 5553 and in Girja Prasad (Dead) by L.R.s vs. State of MP, 2007 A.I.R. S.C.W. 5589. Thus, the powers, which this Court may exercise against an order of acquittal, are well settled.
Girja Prasad (Dead) By Lrs vs State Of Madhya Pradesh on 27 August, 2007
12. Similar principle has been laid down by the Apex Court in cases of State of Uttar Pradesh vs. Ram Veer Singh and others, 2007 A.I.R. S.C.W. 5553 and in Girja Prasad (Dead) by L.R.s vs. State of MP, 2007 A.I.R. S.C.W. 5589. Thus, the powers, which this Court may exercise against an order of acquittal, are well settled.
Mookkiah & Anr vs State Tr.Insp. Of Police, Tamil Nadu on 4 January, 2013
"4. It is not in dispute that the trial Court, on appreciation of oral and documentary evidence led in by the prosecution and defence, acquitted the accused in respect of the charges leveled against them. On appeal by the State, the High Court, by impugned order, reversed the said decision and convicted the accused under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC and awarded RI for life. Since counsel for the appellants very much emphasized that the High Court has exceeded its jurisdiction in upsetting the order of acquittal into conviction, let us analyze the scope and power of the High Court in an appeal filed against the order of acquittal. This Court in a series of decisions has repeatedly laid down that as the first appellate court the High Court, even while dealing with an appeal against acquittal, was also entitled, and obliged as well, to scan through and if need be reappreciate the entire evidence, though while hoosing to interfere only the court should find an absolute assurance of the guilt on the basis of the evidence on record and not merely because the High Court could take one more possible or a different view only. Except the above, where the matter of the extent and depth of consideration of the appeal is concerned, no distinctions or differences in approach are envisaged in dealing with an appeal as such merely because one was against conviction or the other against an acquittal.
State Of Rajasthan vs Sohan Lal And Ors on 20 April, 2004
[Vide State of Rajasthan vs. Sohan Lal and Others, (2004) 5 SCC 573]"
State Of Karnataka vs Hemareddy Alias Vemareddy And Anr on 27 January, 1981
15. It is also a settled legal position that in acquittal appeals, the appellate Court is not required to rewrite the judgment or to give fresh reasonings, when the reasons assigned by the Court below are found to be just and proper. Such principle is laid down by the Apex Court in the case of State of Karnataka vs. Hemareddy, AIR 1981, SC 1417, wherein it is held as under:
State Of Punjab vs Madan Mohan Lal Verma on 12 August, 2013
17. Further, in the case of State of Punjab vs. Madan Mohan Lal Verma, (2013) 14 SCC 153, the Apex Court has held as under:
Jayaswamy vs State Of Karnataka on 1 June, 2018
18. The Apex Court recently in Jayaswamy vs. State of Karnataka, (2018) 7 SCC 219, has laid down the principles for laying down the powers of appellate court in re-appreciating the evidence in a case where the State has preferred an appeal against acquittal, which read as follows: