LexSHIVAJI SAHEBRAO BOBADE & ANR versus STATE OF MAHARASHTRA
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
A B c f) E F G H SHIVAJI SAHEBRAO BO BADE & ANR. ~. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA August 27, 1973 489 [P. ]AGANMOHAN REDDY, H. R. KHANNA AND V. R KRISHNA !YER, JJ.) Code of l'rin1inal Procedure (Act '5 of 1898)-Sectivn 41}-A.ppeal against 11cquittal-Power of the High Court to interfere-Norn1s for the ~xtrcise of the power. The dangers of exaggerated devotion to the rule of benefit of doubt at the expense of social defence and to the soothing sentiment that all acquittals are al ways good regardless of justice to the victim and the cOmmunity, demand. special emphasis in the contemporary context of escalating crime and escape. The judicial instrument has a public accountability. The cherished principles or golden thread of proof beyond reasonable doubt which runs through the web of our law should not be stretched morbidly to embrace every hunch, hesistancy and degree of doubt. The excessive solicitude reflected in the atti- tude that a thousand guilty men may go but one innocent martyr shalJ not suffer is a false dilemma. Only reasonable doubts belong to the accused. Otherwise any practical system of justice will breakdown and lose credibility with thr. community. If unmeri:ed acouittals become general, they tend to lead to a cynical disregard of the law, and this in turn leads to a public demand for harsher legal presumptions against indicated 'persons' and more :;evere punish- ment of those who are found guilty, Jurisprudential entbusiasn1 for presumed innocence must be m')derated by the pragmatic need to make criminal justice potent and realistic. A balance has to be struck between chasing chance possi- bilities as good enough to set the delinquent free and chopping the logic of pre~ ponderant probability to punish marginal innocents. Certainly, in the last analysis, reasonable doubts must operate to the advan- tage of'the appellant. Jn India the law has been laid on these Jines Jong ago. The appellants were charged un-;!.er s. 302 read with section 34 of the Indian Penal Code. The Sessions Court gave the accused the b~nefit of doubt and acquitted thern. On appeal the High Court after elaborate consideration of lhe evidence and the grounds relied upQn by the trial judge to discard the prose- cution case, reversed the findings and convicted both the accused to imprison- ment for life. Confirming the c'Jnviction and sentence and disn1is':ing the r.ppeal, HELD : This Court had ever since its inception considered the correct principle to be applied by the court in an appeal a~ainst an order of ac9uittal and held that the High Court has full power to review at large the ev1de~ce upon which the order of acquittal was founded and to reach the conclusion that upon that evidence the order o.f acquittal should be reversed .. Jn Jaw there -are no fetters on the plenary power of the. appellate court. to revu:w the whole evidence on which the order uf acquittl!.l_is founded and, Indeed, It has a _duty to scrutinise the probative material de novo informed, however, by th~ weighty thought that the rebutt~ble innocence attribut~d. to the accused havipg. )'een converted into an acou1ttal the homage our JUnspruden~e o~es to Ind1v1dual liberty constrains the higher court not to upset the hold1n~ without verr con- vincing reasOns and compretlensive consideration. The High Court's Judgment 5urvives this exactin~ standard. f493Fl Sh&> Swaruv v'. Kinp-Emptror. [1934] L.R. 61 I.A: 398, Sanwat Sing/~ v. St•I• of Raiasthan. [!961] 3 S.C.R. 120 and Harbans Smgh v. Stat• of Pun1rrJJ. [lg62] Supp. I S.C.R. 104, referred to. h hi! the nitive stratellY of the Pi:nal Code n1fficientlv retl!~~e~b~ !d~~n ~rends i:U correctional treatment and personalised sentencing.] .J 9 0 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [ 1974] 1 s.c.R. CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal No. 26 A of 1970. Appeal by special leave from the judgment and order dated February 4/5 February, 1969 of the High Court of Bombay in Crimi- nal Appeal No. 800 of 1967. V. C. Parashar, for the appellants. S. B. Wad and S. P. Nayar, for the respondent. B The J udgmcnt of the Court was delivered by KRISHNA !YER, J. The murder of an old man in broad day Jii:Jtt occurred on 26th September, 1966, on a country road in Satara District and about seven years later the fluctuating fortunes of the two young persons charged with the crime are being finally set at rest. One of the misfortunes of our criminal proce
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.