The Supreme Court has emphasized that the appellate court is not authorized to reverse an acquittal solely based on the condition that after re-appreciating evidence, it is of the view that the guilt of the accused was established beyond a reasonable doubt. 

The said matter was heard before the division bench of Justices Abhay S Oka and Sanjay Karol.

The Court in its order said -

"Only by recording such a conclusion an order of acquittal cannot be reversed unless the appellate court also concludes that it was the only possible conclusion," 

Case Brief -

The Court was dealing with an appeal challenging the orders of the Karnataka High Court, reversing acquittal of the accused, the Court held that the appellate court must adhere to when considering the reversal of a trial court's acquittal judgment in criminal cases under Section 378 CPC.

"If the view taken by the trial court is a possible view, the appellate court cannot interfere with the order of acquittal on the ground that another view could have been taken," the bench said.

Further, the bench said that in many cases, the trial judge who eventually passed the order of acquittal has an occasion to record the oral testimony of all material witnesses. Thus, in such cases, the trial court has the additional advantage of closely observing the prosecution witnesses and their demeanour. 

"While deciding about the reliability of the version of prosecution witnesses, their demeanour remains in the back of the mind of the trial judge. As observed in the commentary by Sarkar on the Law of Evidence, the demeanour of a witness frequently furnishes a clue to the weight of his testimony. This aspect has to be borne in mind while dealing with an appeal against acquittal," the bench said.

"The appellate court can interfere with the order of acquittal only if it comes to a finding that the only conclusion which can be recorded on the basis of the evidence on record was that the guilt of the accused was proved beyond a reasonable doubt and no other conclusion was possible," the bench said.

The bench in its judgement grants permission to file an appeal by one H D Sundara and others and set aside the orders of Karnataka High Court holding them guilty of offences punishable under Part I of Sec 304 and 324 read with Sec 149 of IPC, with rigorous imprisonment for seven years.

After hearing senior advocate S Nagamuthu on behalf of accused-appellants and Additional Advocate General Nishanth Patil, the bench found that there was no discussion about the testimony of eyewitnesses for deciding whether their testimony could be believed. In fact, there are no findings recorded by the High Court after reappreciating the evidence. 

"There is not even a finding to indicate that the High Court considered the question whether the view taken by the Trial Court was a possible view. Without recording any reasons and without recording any finding regarding the role played by the appellants individually and collectively, the High Court has jumped to the conclusion that the guilt of the accused has been established," the bench noted.

"Thus the only conclusion which can be drawn is that the High Court, as an appellate court, while hearing the appeal against acquittal, has not done its duty," the bench said.