Simplified Explanation of the Judgment
In a recent decision, the Patna High Court reaffirmed a trial court’s acquittal of five individuals accused of attempt to murder and assault. The Court emphasized that an acquittal can only be overturned if it is perverse or unsupported by evidence—neither of which applied in this case.
This criminal appeal was filed by the complainant (appellant) against the acquittal judgment dated 16.11.2018 passed by the Fast Track Court-I, Bhabua, in Sessions Trial No. 25/2012. The case originated from Mohania P.S. Case No. 228 of 2010.
The trial court had acquitted all five accused (respondents 2 to 6) of offences under Sections 341, 323, and 307 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code (wrongful restraint, voluntarily causing hurt, and attempt to murder with common intention). The complainant challenged this acquittal before the High Court, alleging that:
- The trial court did not give the prosecution enough opportunity to present its case.
- The evidence of PW1 (prosecution witness) was not properly considered.
However, the High Court found these arguments to be without merit. It observed that:
- The prosecution had sufficient opportunities to examine witnesses but failed to do so.
- Only one witness, PW1 (Sharda Devi), who was the mother of the informant, was examined.
- The other eyewitnesses—including the informant and other injured persons—did not appear.
- Even the investigating officer and the medical doctor were not examined.
This, the Court noted, meant that critical elements of the case—such as injuries, the place of occurrence, and corroboration of the sequence of events—were missing from the record. PW1’s testimony was inconsistent with the initial statement (fard-e-beyan), and no other corroborative evidence was brought on record.
Citing the settled principle that an appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the judgment is unreasonable or absurd, the High Court found that the trial court had rightly considered all available evidence. Since the prosecution could not prove the case beyond reasonable doubt, the acquittal stood.
As a result, the High Court dismissed the criminal appeal at the admission stage itself.
Significance or Implication of the Judgment
This judgment reaffirms the high standard required to overturn an acquittal in a criminal case. It reflects the legal principle that the burden of proof lies entirely with the prosecution, and any gaps in investigation or failure to present key witnesses can lead to acquittal.
The case also highlights the importance of thorough trial preparation and witness management by the prosecution. In this instance, the absence of the investigating officer, medical evidence, and eyewitnesses fatally weakened the case.
For the general public, this decision emphasizes that in criminal justice, accusations alone are not sufficient—evidence must be robust, consistent, and legally sound. For complainants, the ruling is a cautionary reminder that appellate courts will not entertain challenges to acquittals lightly unless the trial court’s order is perverse or clearly flawed.
Legal Issue(s) Decided and the Court’s Decision with Reasoning
- Was the trial court wrong in acquitting the accused persons?
- Decision: No
- Reasoning: The trial court gave ample opportunity to the prosecution, but crucial witnesses did not appear. Evidence was not sufficient to prove the charges beyond reasonable doubt.
- Did the High Court find the acquittal judgment perverse or legally flawed?
- Decision: No
- Reasoning: The judgment was based on available evidence. It was well-reasoned and did not reflect any absurdity or legal mistake.
- Should the appellate court interfere in every acquittal appeal?
- Decision: No
- Reasoning: Unless the trial court’s findings are manifestly wrong or unsupported by evidence, interference is not warranted.
Judgments Relied Upon or Cited by Court
General principle: Acquittals should not be disturbed unless the judgment is absurd or devoid of evidence.
Case Title
Nirbhay Kumar Singh @ Ashok Singh vs The State of Bihar & Others
Case Number
Criminal Appeal (DB) No.524 of 2019
Arising out of Criminal Appeal (SJ) No.720 of 2019
Citation(s)
2021(1)PLJR 69
Coram and Names of Judges
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Hemant Kumar Srivastava
Hon’ble Mr. Justice Prabhat Kumar Singh
Names of Advocates and Who They Appeared For
For the Appellant: Mr. Vikramdeo Singh, Mr. Pawan Kumar Singh
For the State: Mr. Shiwesh Chandra Mishra, APP
Link to Judgment
https://patnahighcourt.gov.in/viewjudgment/NSM1MjQjMjAxOSMxI04=-Ci9CX7wM9jc=
If you found this explanation helpful and wish to stay informed about how legal developments may affect your rights in Bihar, you may consider following Samvida Law Associates for more updates.
