Petitioner sought leave to appeal an acquittal judgment regarding a fatal tree-felling accident. The High Court held the trial court's finding of lack of evidence was not perverse and dismissed the application.
Application for leave to appeal against acquittal was dismissed.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
1
NAFR
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR
CRMP No. 868 of 2016
---- Petitioner
Versus
Respondents No.2 to 7 residing under P.S. & Tahsil Janjgir, District Janjgir Champa, Chhattisgarh.
---- Respondent
For Petitioner Shri Hanuman Prasad Agrawal, Advocate For Respondent/State Shri R.K. Mishra, Dy. Adv. General
2
Hon'ble Shri Justice Prashant Kumar Mishra Hon'ble Shri Justice Chandra Bhushan Bajpai
Order On Board
Per Prashant Kumar Mishra, J.
19/08/2016
3
4
evidence to conclude that the accused persons were involved in cutting the tree is born out from the record and the said finding is not perverse. In any case when two views are possible in the case and the trial Court has taken one of the views, the judgment of acquittal should not be converted into a judgment of conviction. (See : State of M.P. v. Bachhudas alias Balram and others1 ). The finding arrived at is not so perverse or unreasonable that it has been recorded contrary to the record.
Sd/sd/-
Judge Judge Prashant Kumar Mishra Chandra Bhushan Bajpai
Gowri
1 (2007) 9 SCC 135
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court can interfere with the trial court's finding of acquittal due to lack of evidence against co-accused.
Whether the trial court's conclusion that prosecution failed to prove case beyond reasonable doubt is perverse.
Whether leave to appeal against acquittal should be granted on merits.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
State of M.P. v. Bachhudas alias Balram and othersReferred¶29
State of M.P. v. Bachhudas alias Balram and others (2007) 9 SCC 135 · Who else cites this
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohammad Sajjad Alam
State Of Chhattisgarh
Narayan Kashyap
Videshi Kashyap
Bablu @ Pitambar
Baijudas Mankikpuri
Prashant Kumar Mishra
Chandra Bhushan Bajpai
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
