The Supreme Court on Tuesday underlined that overturning an acquittal is not a routine exercise and can be done only for “substantial and compelling reasons,” as it upheld an Allahabad High Court judgment that had set aside the conviction of three accused in a murder case.
A bench comprising Justices K. Vinod Chandran and N.V. Anjaria reiterated that once an accused person is acquitted, the presumption of innocence does not merely continue but stands reinforced. Any appellate interference with such an acquittal, the court said, must therefore be limited and guided by strong and cogent reasons.
The bench made it clear that an acquittal cannot be reversed simply because an appellate court believes another view of the evidence is possible. Even when an appellate court undertakes a reappreciation of evidence, the innocence attributed to an acquitted accused remains a weighty consideration that cannot be brushed aside lightly.
Emphasising core principles of criminal jurisprudence, the Supreme Court said that the guilt of the accused and the commission of the offence must be proved beyond reasonable doubt. The standard does not dilute merely because a higher court is examining the matter.
Turning to the facts of the case, the apex court noted that the Allahabad High Court had carefully examined the evidence on record while reversing the trial court’s conviction. The High Court, it observed, had taken into account the relevant aspects emerging from the evidence and arrived at a plausible conclusion while acquitting the accused.
Finding no compelling reason to interfere with that assessment, the Supreme Court upheld the High Court’s order, reinforcing the settled legal position that reversal of acquittal should remain an exception, not the norm.
