Susheela Yogish Bungle and Anr. Vs. V.T. Impex Ltd. and Anr. - The Appellate Court cannot reverse the order of acquittal only because another view could have been possibly taken based on the evidence on record. It is open for the Appellate Court to interfere with an order of acquittal only if, after re-appreciation of evidence, the Appellate Court concludes that the only possible finding which could be arrived at is that the guilt of the accused was established beyond a reasonable doubt.

SCI (2024.08.13) in Susheela Yogish Bungle and Anr. Vs. V.T. Impex Ltd. and Anr.  [Criminal Appeal No(s). 3351-3352 of 2024] held that; 

• The Appellate Court cannot reverse the order of acquittal only because another view could have been possibly taken based on the evidence on record. It is open for the Appellate Court to interfere with an order of acquittal only if, after re-appreciation of evidence, the Appellate Court concludes that the only possible finding which could be arrived at is that the guilt of the accused was established beyond a reasonable doubt.

• At the highest, the High Court’s findings suggest that another view was possible, which could have been taken based on the evidence on record. That is no ground to interfere with the order of acquittal as an order of acquittal further strengthens the presumption of innocence.

Excerpts of the Order;

# 1. Heard the learned counsel appearing for the parties.

# 2. Leave granted.

# 3. The first respondent filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881. The learned Magistrate passed an order of acquittal holding that the first respondent did not perform its part of the memorandum of understanding and, therefore, the appellants’ liability to repay a sum of Rs.26 lakh with interest was not established.

# 4. With the assistance of the learned counsel appearing for the parties, we have carefully perused the impugned judgment of the High Court by which the order of acquittal has been overturned, and an order of conviction has been passed.

# 5. The law relating to interference in an appeal against acquittal is well-settled. The Appellate Court cannot reverse the order of acquittal only because another view could have been possibly taken based on the evidence on record. It is open for the Appellate Court to interfere with an order of acquittal only if, after re-appreciation of evidence, the Appellate Court concludes that the only possible finding which could be arrived at is that the guilt of the accused was established beyond a reasonable doubt.

# 6. After having perused the findings recorded by the High Court, firstly, we find that there is no categorical finding recorded that the High Court was satisfied that after appreciating the evidence, the only possible finding could be that the guilt of the accused has been proved beyond a reasonable doubt. At the highest, the High Court’s findings suggest that another view was possible, which could have been taken based on the evidence on record. That is no ground to interfere with the order of acquittal as an order of acquittal further strengthens the presumption of innocence.

# 7. Therefore, the impugned judgment of the High Court cannot be sustained. Hence, the impugned judgment is set aside, and the order of acquittal of the appellants passed by the learned Magistrate is restored.

# 8. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, we permit the first respondent to withdraw a sum of Rs.21 lakh deposited by the appellants with the Trial Court. If the said amount is already invested in a fixed deposit, the first respondent will be entitled to withdraw the interest accrued thereon.

# 9. We make it clear that notwithstanding the appellants’ acquittal, the first respondent’s remedy of filing a civil suit for recovery of the amount will remain open and can be prosecuted in accordance with law.

# 10. The Appeals are, accordingly, allowed on the above terms.

---------------------------------------------