Appellate Courts Can Interfere With Acquittal Judgments Despite Double Presumption In Favour Of Accused: Kerala High Court
Live LawWhile reversing an order of acquittal in a bribery case against a village officer, the Kerala High Court recently observed that CrPC does not mandate the appellate court to differentiate between the appeals against judgments of conviction or acquittal and that they have the same powers while dealing with both. It was also argued that the court below failed to consider the existence of the presumption of acceptance of illegal gratification under Section 20 of the PC Act, even without direct evidence for the demand for money. The Court relied upon the decisions of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council in Sheo Swarup v. King Emperor and Nur Mohammed v. King Emperor and other Apex Court decisions and stated that the appellate court has wide power in interfering with orders of acquittals to undo patent errors of law, grave miscarriage of justice, perverse findings of fact, excluding relevant evidence, considering irrelevant evidence etc. The Court also noted that the Special judge failed to ignore the existence of a strong presumption against the accused under Section 20 that acceptance of illegal money can be proved even without direct evidence. In this case, the condition precedent to draw such a legal presumption that the accused has demanded and was paid the bribe money has been proved and established by the incriminating material on record.” The Court analysed the evidence, sequence of events, and circumstances and held that the accused had committed the offences under the PC Act and set aside the order of acquittal passed by the Special Court.