Government Appeals before High Court challenge the judgments of the trial courts where the court has acquitted the accused. Section 378 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 outlines the process for appealing an acquittal. It allows the District Magistrate, State Government, or Central Government to direct a Public Prosecutor to appeal certain acquittals. Appeals to the High Court require permission of the State Government where the judgment is passed by any other court except the court of magistrate. Complainants can also appeal with special leave from the High Court.
In case of Government Appeals, the State is the appellant before the High Court and the appeal is against acquittal of the accused. The law has been laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court regarding the scope of Government Appeals against Acquittal in the case of Kanhaiya Lal and others v. State of Rajasthan wherein it held that unless there are substantial and compelling reasons, judgment of acquittal cannot be overturned.
It is important to note that the acquittal strengthens presumption of innocence of the accused, and therefore, it cannot be lightly interfered with by the High Court. An appellate court, hence, must bear in mind that in case of acquittal, the double presumption in favour of the accused is in the following two kinds. Firstly, the presumption of innocence is available to him under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed to be innocent unless he is proved guilty by a competent court of law. Secondly, the accused having secured his acquittal, the presumption of his innocence is further reinforced, reaffirmed and strengthened by the trial court.
However, these findings by the Apex Court do not dilute the power of appellate court to review the evidence. The power of reviewing evidence is wide and the appellate court can re- appreciate the entire evidence on record. It can review the trial court’s conclusion with respect to both facts and law, but the Appellate Court must give due weight and consideration to the decision of the trial court. The trial court has the advantage of watching the demeanor of witnesses due to which it is better positioned to appreciate the credibility of the witnesses and therefore, the decision it arrives at has its due weight.
However, it has been held by the Hon’ble Apex Court in the case of Rajendra@Rajappa and others v. State of Karntaka, that there cannot be any straight jacket formula to apply readily for such appeals against acquittals. Whether the view taken by the trial court is a possible view or not; whether the findings recorded by the trial court are in conformity with the evidence or not; are the matters which depend upon facts and circumstances of each case and the evidence on record. By reappreciating evidence on record, if the appellate court comes to conclusion that findings recorded by the trial court are erroneous and contrary to law, it is always open for the appellate court, by recording “good and compelling reasons” for interference, and overturn the judgment of acquittal by converting the same to that of conviction.
To conclude, the counsel for the respondent, i.e. the advocate on behalf of the accused must focus on the loopholes in the prosecution story in order to strengthen the arguments in their favor as provided in the judgment. For better understanding of your case, please contact a seasoned advocate for legal advice.