Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI) against the judgment of the Uttarakhand High Court, which had rejected the leave to appeal against the acquittal of the respondents (Shyam Bihari and others) in a murder case. The case arose from an incident on June 24, 1987, when Raj Kumar Baliyan was killed in a police firing. Two versions of the incident were lodged: one by Pramod Kumar Tyagi (PW-6) alleging that three policemen flashed a torch, causing the deceased's scooter to skid, and then shot him; another by Mahindra Singh claiming that the police were patrolling due to a prior robbery and fired in self-defense. The trial court acquitted the accused, holding that the prosecution witnesses (PW-3 and PW-6) were not credible due to inconsistencies with medical evidence and other circumstances. The High Court condoned the delay in filing the appeal but rejected the leave to appeal under Section 378(3) CrPC, leading to the dismissal of the government appeal. The CBI appealed to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court examined the evidence and found that the trial court's acquittal was based on a plausible view, and the High Court's refusal to grant leave was not perverse. The Court noted that the prosecution witnesses had given contradictory statements and their testimonies were not corroborated by medical evidence. The Supreme Court held that there was no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings and dismissed the appeal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Appeal against acquittal - Section 378(3) CrPC - Leave to appeal - High Court's rejection of leave to appeal against acquittal upheld - The Supreme Court held that the High Court's order refusing leave to appeal was not perverse or unreasonable, as the trial court's acquittal was based on a plausible view of evidence and the prosecution witnesses were found unreliable (Paras 1-21). B) Evidence Act - Appreciation of evidence - Credibility of witnesses - Murder case - Police firing - The trial court had acquitted the accused on the ground that the prosecution witnesses (PW-3 and PW-6) were not credible, as their testimonies were inconsistent with medical evidence and other circumstances - The Supreme Court found no reason to interfere with the concurrent findings of fact (Paras 2-20). C) Criminal Law - Murder - Police constables - Acquittal - Benefit of doubt - The prosecution failed to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the respondents caused the death of Raj Kumar Baliyan - The trial court's view was a possible view, and the High Court's refusal to grant leave was justified (Paras 1-21).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in rejecting the leave to appeal against the acquittal of the respondents under Section 378(3) CrPC, and whether the trial court's acquittal was perverse or based on misappreciation of evidence.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the High Court's order rejecting leave to appeal against acquittal.
Law Points
- Appeal against acquittal
- Section 378 CrPC
- Leave to appeal
- Interference with acquittal
- Appreciation of evidence
- Credibility of witnesses
- Benefit of doubt
