The Supreme Court of India in a recent judgment reiterated and set aside an order of conviction for murder, emphasizing that an appellate court cannot overturn an order of acquittal merely because another viewpoint is conceivable. The decision underscores the importance of respecting the trial court's plausible views based on evidence during the appellate process.

The case, presided over by Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Ujjal Bhuyan, delved into the nuanced balance between appellate review and trial court determinations. The justices emphasized that while hearing an appeal against acquittal, the appellate court's role primarily involves reevaluating the evidence presented. The critical question, therefore, becomes whether the trial court's perspective was a reasonable interpretation supported by the evidence on record.

The matter at hand stemmed from an initial acquittal by the Trial Court in 1997 under Section 302, read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, in 2018, the Gujarat High Court overturned this decision, converting the acquittal into a conviction under Sections 302, 34, and 323 of the IPC.

Central to the Supreme Court's decision was a deep dive into the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), particularly Section 162. This section stipulates that police statements under Section 161 of the CrPC are admissible only for contradicting witnesses and not for substantive purposes. 

The Court highlighted the Trial Court's meticulous examination of witness testimony, including the reasons for discounting the testimony of PW-4 based on prior enmity and failure to report the incident promptly.

The Supreme Court's analysis emphasized that for an appellate court to interfere with an order of acquittal, it must be unequivocally convinced, upon reevaluating the evidence, that the accused's guilt is established beyond a reasonable doubt. 

Mere alternative interpretations or possibilities are insufficient grounds for overturning a lower court's decision. This reaffirmation of legal principles safeguards against arbitrary reversals of trial court findings and ensures a robust appellate review process grounded in evidentiary standards and legal reasoning.

The Supreme Court pointed out that an appellate court cannot overturn an order of acquittal only on the ground that another view is possible. “As is apparent from Section 162 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC), statements recorded by police under Section 161 of the CrPC cannot be used for any purpose except to contradict the witness. The Trial Court gives several reasons for discarding the testimony of PW-4. His prior enmity with the appellants and his failure to report the incident to the police, notwithstanding available opportunities, are also the factors considered by the Trial Court,” the Court noted.

The Court found no reason for the High Court to overturn the order of acquittal when the findings of the Trial Court were possible findings that could be arrived at after re-appreciating evidence.

Accordingly, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal.

Case: Bhupatbhai Bachubhai Chavda & Anr. vs. State of Gujarat,

CRIMINAL APPEAL NO. 334 OF 2019.

Click to read/download judgment.