Allahabad High Court Upholds Acquittal in Attempted Murder Case

Court finds prosecution evidence insufficient; delay in filing FIR raises doubts about case credibility

In a significant judgment, the Allahabad High Court upheld the acquittal of three individuals charged with attempted murder, among other offenses, in the case of Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P. The court dismissed the appeal filed by the complainant-appellant, Sanjay Kumar, challenging the trial court's decision to acquit the accused due to inconsistencies in evidence and procedural delays.

The case stemmed from an incident on May 28, 2018, in Agra, where the complainant alleged that he was attacked by the accused, resulting in serious injuries. Despite the complainant's testimony and medical examination, the trial court found significant contradictions between the complainant's account and the medical evidence. Additionally, the complainant's failure to provide corroborative witness testimony and the unexplained 16-day delay in lodging the First Information Report (FIR) further weakened the prosecution's case.

The High Court, in its judgment, emphasized the principle that an appellate court should not interfere with an acquittal unless the trial court's findings are perverse or manifestly erroneous. The court noted the absence of corroborative evidence, the inconsistencies in the complainant's testimony, and the failure to explain the delay in filing the FIR as critical factors supporting the acquittal.

Justice Dr. Ajay Kumar-II, delivering the judgment, underscored the importance of cogent, reliable, and consistent evidence, especially when relying on a sole injured witness. The court reiterated that the presence of unexplained procedural delays and contradictions in the evidence could not sustain a conviction.

The judgment also referenced multiple Supreme Court rulings, highlighting the necessity for the prosecution to prove charges beyond reasonable doubt and the need for appellate courts to exercise restraint when reviewing acquittals. The court concluded that the trial court's decision was legally sound and that the prosecution failed to establish the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.

This ruling underscores the judiciary's commitment to ensuring fair trials and the adherence to due process, especially in criminal cases where the liberty of individuals is at stake.

Bottom Line:

Appeal against acquittal - Interference by appellate court permissible only if findings of the trial court are perverse, based on misreading or omission to consider material evidence, or if no other reasonable view consistent with innocence is possible.

Statutory provision(s): Indian Penal Code, Sections 307, 323, 504, 506; Criminal Procedure Code, Section 313.

Sanjay Kumar v. State of U.P., (Allahabad)(DB) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2809365