Court acquitted the accused on medical examination report of doctor and did not look the other evidence. An offence committed when my brother was going to market. When he reached at Kapur Marg someone pushed him. Thereafter, altercation started between my brother and that person. At the same time few other people assembled near the place and threaten my brother. Somehow the quarrel stopped, and my brother returned to home. Few days after he came to know that it was a conspiracy of XXX. There was a dispute between my brother and XXX. My brother wanted to buy a land which was later on purchased by XXX. One day when my brother was stayed in his friend’s home, XXX came through the terrace and assaulted my brother. FIR was lodged and XXX arrested. At the stage of trial, prosecution produced the medical opinion of doctor. Who says that injuries on the body of XXX was two days old. Whereas my brother had lodged FIR within one hour of incident and accused had been arrested within seven hours of lodging FIR. The neighbours and servant of his friend also stated that XXX was present and assulted the complainant. They told that accused was coming out of that home. The trial court acquitted the accused only on the basis of medical examination report that injuries are two days old. Please suggest is there any possibility in appeal.
Asked from: Uttar Pradesh
I believe that the neighbors were made prosecution witnesses in your case. If those witnesses testified that they saw the accused coming out of the home, and the friend’s servant, who was also present in the home, deposed that the accused came from the terrace and assaulted the complainant, then the eyewitnesses are establishing the prosecution’s case. In such a scenario, the expert’s opinion becomes immaterial. It is a settled principle of law that the court is not bound by the opinion of an expert.
The trial court has disregarded the statements of the eyewitnesses, whose evidence is crucial to the case. The prosecution has fulfilled its burden of proof once the offense is established through the testimony of eyewitnesses. The injuries sustained by the accused are irrelevant if there is no allegation that the complainant also inflicted injuries on the accused during the altercation.
The primary allegations are housebreaking and assault. If the evidence proves that the accused committed housebreaking and assaulted the complainant, there is no need to place emphasis on the accused’s injuries. In Ghure Lal vs State of U.P. (2008) 10 SCC 450, the Supreme Court held that
A judgment of acquittal may only be reversed or otherwise disturbed for very substantial and compelling reasons. Such reasons exist when the trial court has ignored evidence, misread material evidence, or overlooked crucial documents.
In your case, the trial court has ignored the evidence of the eyewitnesses, which is vital to establishing the guilt of the accused. There is no justification for basing the judgment on the injuries sustained by the accused if there is no allegation of assault by the victim. The offense of housebreaking is fully established by the testimony of the servant and the neighbors. Therefore, there is a strong possibility that the appellate court may reverse the judgment of acquittal. I advise you to file an appeal as soon as possible.
Also read: Falsely implicated in the offence under Section 149 IPC