In this criminal appeal under Section 378 CrPC filed by the State of Telangana, the High Court dismissed the appeal against the acquittal of the accused in a rape case. The court applied well-settled principles requiring substantial grounds to disturb an acquittal and found no infirmities in the Sessions Judge's judgment.
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.
[32sl I
oF TELANGANA rN rHEHrGH "orTf8$otffoBtf;otE s AruRD Ay,rH Erwixy^lllil1illrtl"Tffi e u ae n
PRESENT
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICE K'SURENDER
cRIMtNALAPPEALNO: OF 20
criminarAppearundersections378(3) & (1) ofcrr.p.c against the JudgmentDated 17 t11l2021in Spl S c No'2212019on the file of the court of the SpecialSessions Judgefor Fast Trackingthe Cases Relatingto Atrocities AgainstWomen-cum-Vl Additional Districtand Sessions Judge at Adilabad'
Between:
The Stateof Telangana'.rep gy]^hePublic Prosecutor' High Courtfor theState ;i'ii;;-r;;'iYde-rabad - soo066
...APELLANT
AND
o ccAsri curtu re' M adaviS h ea ku,sl",; glliY; fi 3ii,1 f Xtli3?1t"r,3,::l-tt' R/o. Kheslagudaol Keramerrrvrdr ruot vr
..RES'ODENT
Counselfor the Appellant : PUBLICPROSECUTOR
M/s' V'YADU KRISHNA SAINATH Counselfor the Respondent: The Courtmade the following:OROER
THE HONOURABLESRI JUSTICE K.SURENDER
CRIMI NALAPPEALNO.324 0F 2022
JUD ME T
Thepresenl CriminolAppeolis filed under Section 378(3) & (l ) of the Code ofCriminolProcedure, lgT3 (for short"Cr'P'C") by the Stote oggrieved bythe ocquiitolJudgmenl doted 17,l12021possedin Spl.SC No.22of 2019 by the leorned Speciol SessionsJudge for Fost Trockingthe Coses Relotingio Atrociiies Agoinsl Women - cum - Vl Aclditionol Districlond Sessions Judgeot Adilobodfor the offences punishoble under Sections376(2) (n)' 417 ond 506 of the lndionPenol Code
Crl.A.No.324 2022
2
morried onother womon, for which reoson, PWI lodged o comploint before thepolice.
t
Crl.A.No.3242022
I I
6 ln GhureYLol v. Stole of lJtlor Prodesh2lhe Hon'bleSupreme Court ofterreferringto severol Judgmentsregording the settled principles of lowond the powersof oppellote Courl in reversing lhe order of ocquittol.held ot poro70' os follows
"70. ln lhe lightof the obove' lhe High Courtond other rr.-"ltor" CJurts shouldf ollaw lhe well-setlledprinciples IXiait"o Jir'r.o"r.of Judgmentsif it is going to overrule or .rtie.*;redr5lurblhe tliol court'socquillol:
l. Ihe oppellolecourlmoY onlYoverrule or olherwise distt'rb tn""iiJ-Zii"tt'socquilio/it itnos "very subsfontiol ond compel/ingreosons"f or doing so'
A numbd ofinslonces orise in which lhe oppeliotecourt would f.,,ro u"- ,rb, lontiol ondcompelting reosons" lo discordihe t;b; .r;;; i o..i,Ln."verysubstontiolond compettiisreosons" 6xislwhen:
The lriol court'sconclusionwittl regordto lhef octs is polpctbly wrong
i) fhelriol court's decision wos bosed on on enoneous view of low:
'(2022)8 Supremecourt Cases5f6
'12008110 SuPremeCourtCases450
Crl.A.No.324 2022
4
ii) The triol caurl's judgmenl is likely lo result in "grove miscorrioge of justae" ;
iii) fhe entire opprooch of the triol court in deoling with the evidence wos potently illegol) iv) The triol couts judgment wos monifestly unjust ond unreosonoble:
v) The triol court hos ignored the evidence or misreod the moteriol evidence or hos ignored moteriol docurnenls like dying declorotions/teport of the bollistic expert, etc.
vy' Ihis /isl is inlended to be illustrotive, not exhoustive.
findings ore on the bosis of evidence recorded. When the findings of the leorned Sessions Judge ore reosonoble, the oppellote Court while deciding the oppeol ogoinst ocquittol connol interfere unless lhey ore not bosed on record, unreosonoble, unlowful or untenoble
B. ln view of obove focts ond circumstonces, I do not find ony
infirmily wilh thejudgmenl of the leorned Sessions Judge.
some is dismissed. Consequently, miscelloneouspelitions, endin
ony , sholl stond closed.
Sd/. T. SRINIVAS DEPUTY REGISTRAR @ SECTION OFFICER
//TRUECOPY//
DL Y{-
\
HIGH COURT DATED:23l09/2023
ORDER CRLA.No.324of 2022
f: TA Tc' il
co)q 0'j ii 1 o
.+
*' 4
t) a
I -.::-'
anz
DISMISSINGTHE CRIMINALAPPEAL
+cY% w- (t'(a
2 issues framed by the court
Whether criminal appeal by the State against an acquittal is maintainable in light of settled principles of law regarding appellate power in acquittal cases.
Whether the High Court can reverse the trial court's finding of acquittal absent very substantial and compelling reasons.
The State of Telangana
C.Sriananda Kumar Madavi
K. Surender
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
