The Delhi High Court upheld a 2014 acquittal in a robbery case, ruling that appellate courts should interfere only if findings are perverse. It reiterated the settled principle of “double presumption of innocence” in favour of an accused after acquittal.
New Delhi: The Delhi High Court has upheld a trial court’s decision to acquit an accused in a robbery case, clearly stating that an appellate court can interfere with an acquittal only when the findings of the trial court are “perverse”.
Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri was hearing an appeal filed by the prosecution against a Sessions Court order passed in November 2014, which had acquitted the accused.
While dismissing the appeal, the High Court emphasised the settled legal position that courts must exercise great caution while interfering with an acquittal.
In an order dated December 17, the High Court observed,
“It is trite law that an appellate court must be slow to interfere in an appeal against acquittal unless the findings of the trial court are shown to be perverse.”
The Court made it clear that merely because another view is possible, an acquittal cannot be overturned.
Justice Ohri further highlighted the importance of the legal doctrine known as the “double presumption of innocence”.
ALSO READ: Notorious Dacoit Escapes Police Custody Inside Dharmanagar Court Complex
Explaining this principle, the Court stated,
“The principle of double presumption of innocence, which operates in favour of an accused after acquittal, is well-settled.”
The Court elaborated that this principle works at two stages. First, under the basic rule of criminal law, every person is presumed innocent until proven guilty by a court of law. Second, once an accused is acquitted by a trial court, this presumption of innocence becomes even stronger.
As noted by the judge,
“The legal principle of double presumption of innocence operates at two levels. One, under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law, and two, the accused having secured an acquittal, the presumption of innocence is further reinforced.”
After examining the records and evidence, the High Court agreed with the trial court’s conclusion that the prosecution had failed to prove the accused’s guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Court noted that the Delhi Police was unable to present sufficient and reliable evidence to establish the charges.
Upholding the acquittal, the High Court concluded that the trial court’s decision was
“plausible, well-reasoned and supported by the evidence”.
On this basis, the Court found no legal ground to interfere with the acquittal and dismissed the prosecution’s appeal.
The judgment once again reinforces the principle that higher courts should not lightly overturn acquittals and must respect well-reasoned trial court findings, especially in criminal cases where the liberty of an individual is at stake.
Click Here to Read More Reports On Sexual Assault
