Baldeep Singh v. State Of Punjab & ORS
#$%$!&
'('
)* '
+ , - .*
/// /// , - .*
1*2 !
"# $"
"%$& ! '
( )
( "*) +
,-( ./$# "%$0 #%&-1 1 !() !
$# "%$0 3)
!
4
4)5 !
6 7 ,-) -) !
3)
)
8) ) 6 ( "7 %/ $% "%$# ) ) 3 )
) 3)
4
) 8
3)
) )
$/ %% %%%9:)
) ) 5 )!
!)
$% "%$0) ) ; 3)
) $/ %% %%%9:)
< $# "%$0 /%%9&%%
) 8! ) 6 7 ) )! 4 5 ) 3)
) 4
() 4 ) < !
,-
+ ) -
$*# 1 ) )
;
%.
) - ) );
1 +
- 5 = 1 +
- ) =
1
; ! 3)
=
1 + ! )
- 1
!>?$> '
-
- ! @ !
; $# "%$0
4
! ) ) )! 1 ) !
,=
; ! 3)
1 )+
5
) ) - ! !
1 1 1
!
! - )
(
! ) ) 3)
)
!
)
)
)
0
!3)
- )
!
$%* #%&-1 = 1 ) ;
! ; ! - ! !
1 1
)
A ) )) 1 ; ! )
+
+ )
!
- + +$&74
''
&3 ! 4 6%0 12 16$9$& :2 4 ;1 ! + )!
-) + )
:
1) ) + !) ) ! ) )C D)! 4 ;1 1) )
!
+
) !
4 ;1
+ ) !
) ! )
%4 6
;
49 <35:0 (1 + 16$9$& :2
4 B ; 1 ) 5
)
+ -) 1 !
+ ) ) )
) 1 ! -) )
)
+ 1
) ) 1) ) -) 1
1E +
2 '
)
:
:):
"9. This Court has laid down parameters for interference against the order of acquittal time and again. The appellate court should not ordinarily set aside a judgment of acquittal in a case where two views are possible, though the view of the appellate court may be the more probable one. While dealing with a judgment of acquittal, the appellate court has to consider the entire evidence on record, so as to arrive at a finding as to whether the views of the trial court were perverse or otherwise unsustainable. The appellate court is entitled to consider whether in arriving at a finding of fact, the trial court had failed to take into consideration admissible evidence and/or had taken into consideration the evidence brought on record contrary to law. Similarly, wrong placing of burden of proof may also be a subject-matter of scrutiny by the appellate court. In exceptional cases where there are compelling
8 circumstances, 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. Interference in a routine manner where the other view is possible should be avoided, unless there are good reasons for interference. The findings of fact recorded by a court can be held to be perverse if the findings have been arrived at by ignoring or excluding relevant material or by taking into consideration irrelevant/inadmissible material. The finding may also be said to be perverse if it is "against the weight of evidence", or if the finding so outrageously defies logic as to suffer from the vice of irrationality." ))5 ! 4 ;1
= % 4
:$ % &$> 6:'*''
1+''2 '
- ) ! 4 ;1 + 0
1) ! ) ; ! ) ?
4 ;1 '
<$&36
-59
:$ %
+$&74 ?5<:$#
&3$
12 + ( - ) - ! !
1, - .*2
'('
?
5
9 F9( ?
F9(