presumption of innocence of the accused and further that the trial Court's acquittal bolsters the presumption of his innocence

AIR 2013 SUPREME COURT 3033 (From: Allahabad)

Criminal Appeal No. 824 of 2007, 

D/1-7-2013.

State of U. P. v. Gobardhan & Ors. 

(A) Penal Code (45 of 1860), S. 300 Criminal P. C. (2 of 1974), S. 378 Murder Appeal against acquittal Allegations that respondents-accused persons armed with gun, farsa and lathi assaulted deceased on account of dispute relating to taking of water in a field Material discrepancies/contradictions/ inconsistencies in regard to lodging of FIR and investigation Evidence show- ing that though single barrel gun was used in murder but the empty cartridges used in the shooting were not recovered from spot -Postmortem report, stat- ing there was no injury caused to de- ceased by country-made pistol - Pros- ecution failed to explain grievous inju- ries found on person of accused - Or- der of acquittal of respondents, proper No interference. (Paras 9, 11)

(B) Criminal P. C. (2 of 1974), S. 378 Appeal against acquittal Powers of appellate Court-interference in a routine manner where other view is possible should be avoided.

In exceptional cases where there are compelling circumstances to interfere and the judgment under appeal is found to be perverse, the appellate Court can interfere with the order of acquittal. The appellate Court should bear in mind the presumption of innocence of the accused and further that the trial Court's acquittal bolsters the presumption of his innocence. Interfer- ence in a routine manner where the other view is possible should be avoided, unless there are good reasons for interference. In the present case, applying the parameters of interference against the order of acquittal, the Supreme Court is of opinion that no interference is called for. (Paras 10, 11)