Naib Singh v. State Of Punjab And Others
!"#
! $" %&$ ' ( " # $ % #&
" ' ( '))$ % #&
!
" * ) +,$ % % #& -)$
()
.!) #
))
.
"&$
! %!!))
.
.
&/ )
0&.$ 1 (+ ! 2&& &/
$ 1
"+$
& !
)
& $ 5$ 516$ $ 56 $ 7'
4 ) )& % () 8 . % ! )) !
-
#& & "& ) &
.)+ 4
& !
2&& # ! "&
4 &).
)&) .#
!)&
& !
9 -
. .
3 !
.
5
!.$
))
: +$ -
#
.
&
% !!& 9)
.
.)+ #)+ ( &.!) &&
;) ) ) && && .
& !
)
& 1$ 117%$ 61$ 7'
4
!
-
&/ )
9)
.. (
.
&
<7 %4 - & & & . & . !#
& &
.
& # & ) & 9)
!& + .+ ( & &.!) ) !# & &/ !
5 4 !!) ! $ %!!))
.
& 9) #
= 3.
& . & & $ ( #) &&
)(
) .
& . !)& !# &&
.& ) & &
& . & ( )) .& ) & &
#
&&
& &
.
&#& ( . ) & )
! 2&&
&& ) !&
!.
& $
!. !.) / + &&
&..
+ & & !& !# ) !. 9 #)+
! !& !# & + (
) ) & &#& & ) ) & )+ #
!&
) ) )
&& + ) (
>
)
) ! ?& #) :
& ! )) .+ ! )(
1 9 #)
&
& ( &.!) ! # ) + ) %!?
'
*+ ! , -../01' 2)
"The revisional jurisdiction conferred on the High Court under section 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is not to belightly exercised when it is invoked by a private complain ant against an.order of acquittal, against which the Govern ment has a right of appeal under section 417. It could be exercised only in exceptional cases where the interests of public justice require interference for the correction of a manifest illegality or
the prevention of a gross miscarriage of justice. This jurisdiction is not ordinarily invoked or used merely because the lower Court has taken a wrong view of the law or misappreciated the evidence on the record."
7.
9 . !&!) &3 !45 ++!4 + 5 , . .. 6 70' 89:
( )
"......Though sub-section (1) of section 439 authorises the High Court to exercise, in its discretion, any of the powers conferred on a court of appeal by section 423, sub-section (4) specifically excludes the power to "convert a finding of acquittal into one of conviction". This does not mean that in dealing with a revision petition by a private party against an order of acquittal, the High Court could in the absence of any error on a point of law reappraise the evidence and reverse the findings of facts on which the acquittal was based, provided only it stopped short of finding the accused guilty and passing sentence on him. By merely characterising the judgment of the trial Court as "perverse" and "lacking in perspective", the High Court cannot reverse pure findings of fact based on the trial Court's appreciation of the evidence in the case. That is what the learned Judge in the court below has done, but could not, in our opinion, properly do on an application in revision filed by a private party against acquittal......."
)
) ! )( .
& )+ .!)
)
( !!&
! !) #( & )( + #)
&
))+$ ! # ! . ;3;
)# / (1 *5 Whether speaking/reasoned :
Yes/No Whether reportable :
Yes/No