Prosecution's Case 'Must Be Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubts' & Not Merely 'May Be Proved': Allahabad HC Upholds Acquittal Of 6 In 'Riots' Case

While upholding the acquittal of 6 men accused of rioting and assaulting police personnel in Jhansi's Babina district in 2008, the Allahabad High Court recently observed that it is a well-established principle that the prosecution's case 'must be proved beyond reasonable doubts' and not merely 'may be proved'. A bench of Justice Rajiv Gupta and Justice Surendra Singh-I also observed that the scope of interference by an appellate Court for reversing the judgment of acquittal recorded by the trial Court in favour of the accused has to be exercised within the four corners of the following principles: a) That the judgment of acquittal suffers from patent perversity; b) That the same is based on a misreading/omission to consider material evidence on record; c) That no two reasonable views are possible and only the view consistent with the guilt of the accused is possible from the evidence available on record. On the other hand, Advocates Satya Narayan Vashishth and Man Mohan Mishra, appearing for the accused, defended the judgment of acquittal by contending that the reliability of prosecution witnesses was shattered during their cross-examination and the trial court committed no error while appreciating the evidence rendered by the prosecution as well as the defence. Thus, the Court found that the trial Court, after analyzing and scrutinizing the evidence on record, recorded the acquittal of the accused persons, made logical and plausible findings in the judgement, and rightly concluded that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove its case beyond a reasonable doubt.