IMPERMISSIBLE FOR HIGH COURT

The Supreme Court on Tuesday (April 2) reiterated that in the event of the possibility of two views, if the trial court acquits the accused, then it would not be permissible for the High Court to interfere with the trial court's order of acquittal unless the view taken by the trial court was perverse. “In any case, even if two views are possible and the trial Judge found the other view to be more probable, an interference would not have been warranted by the High Court, unless the view taken by the learned trial Judge was a perverse or impossible view.”, the Bench Comprising Justices BR Gavai and Sandeep Mehta said. Reversing the findings of the High Court, the Judgment authored by Justice BR Gavai observed that it would be permissible for the High Court to interfere with the trial court's decision of acquitting the accused only if it comes to the conclusion that the findings of the trial Judge were either perverse or impossible. “We are compelled to say that the findings of the High Court are totally based on conjectures and surmises. Though the High Court has referred to the law laid down by this Court with regard to the scope of interference in an appeal against acquittal, the High Court has totally misapplied the same and a very well-reasoned judgment based upon the correct appreciation of evidence by the trial Court has been reversed by the High Court, only on the basis of conjectures and surmises.”, the court said.