Subhan Khan vs The State of Karnataka and Others

N. Ananda, J.—There are concurrent findings of courts below that prosecution has failed to bring home the guilty of accused (respondents 2 to 6) for offences punishable under sections 143, 147, 148, 504, 448, 323, 427 & 506 r/w 149 IPC. I have heard the learned counsel for parties.

The law 13 fairly well settled that this court while exercising revisional jurisdiction u/s 401 Cr.P.C., does not sit as a court of second appeal. This court can interfere with the impugned judgment if the courts below have committed glaring errors in appreciation of evidence or errors of law resulting manifest injustice to petitioner. It is also well settled principle of law that revisional court is the court of correctional jurisdiction.

In the case on hand, trial court has not considered the evidence of PW 1 to PW 3 and PW 10 on the ground that they are interested witnesses. The learned Judge of I-appellate court should have re-appreciated the evidence. The learned Judge of I-appellate court has failed to notice this mistake committed by trial court. In addition to this, learned Judge of I-appellate court has held that there is inconsistency between oral evidence and medical evidence for the reason that cut injuries were not found on the injured, though it is stated that accused (respondents 2 to 6) assaulted them with cycle chain.

The law is fairly well settled that evidence of interested witnesses cannot be brushed aside, however the court will have to carefully scrutinize the evidence of interested witnesses, besides looking for corroboration from other quarters. The accused (respondents 2 to 6) are alleged to have assaulted petitioner and others in cycle chains. The injured persons had suffered multiple abrasions. The medical evidence has not ruled out possibility of abrasions being caused when a person is assaulted with a cycle chain. In view of the above, courts below have committed glaring errors in appreciation of evidence and the matter requires reconsideration by learned Judge of I-appellate court.

In the result, I pass the following:-

ORDER

The revision petition is accepted. The impugned judgment of acquittal is set aside. The matter is remanded to I-appellate court for reconsideration in accordance with law. The learned Judge of I-appellate court shall hear learned counsel for parties before deciding the case on merits.