#Section 378 CrPC

Madhya Pradesh High Court affirms that complainants in cheque bounce cases under Section 138 NI Act qualify as 'victims' under CrPC, entitling them to appeal acquittal directly under Section 372 CrPC without seeking special leave. This ruling aligns with the Supreme Court's precedent in Celestium Financial, reinforcing victim rights in economic offences.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court has reaffirmed that acquittals under Section 378 CrPC cannot be overturned unless the trial court’s judgment is manifestly perverse or exhibits gross misappreciation of evidence. This ruling strengthens the presumption of innocence in environmental and mining-related prosecutions where identification and chain-of-custody evidence are weak, setting a high bar for state appeals in quasi-criminal regulatory cases.

Madhya Pradesh High Court clarifies that the threshold for granting leave to appeal against acquittal under Section 378(4) CrPC requires only a prima facie case or arguable points, not proof of perversity at the initial stage. This ruling lowers the bar for appellants seeking to challenge acquittals, impacting criminal appellate practice.

The Madhya Pradesh High Court ruled that where prima facie evidence and the statutory presumption under Section 29 of the POCSO Act exist, leave to appeal against acquittal must be granted. This sets a precedent reinforcing victims' rights to challenge acquittals in sexual offence cases, ensuring judicial re-examination of evidence where statutory presumptions favour the prosecution.

Bombay High Court Aurangabad Bench reaffirms that appellate courts cannot substitute their view for the trial court's acquittal unless witness inconsistencies amount to perverse appreciation of evidence. The ruling underscores the high threshold for overturning acquittals under Section 378 CrPC, impacting prosecutors and defense lawyers in criminal appeals.

The Gujarat High Court reiterated that an acquittal can only be overturned under Section 378 CrPC if the trial court's findings are perverse or no reasonable conclusion supports the verdict. The ruling underscores the double presumption of innocence and the necessity of an unbroken chain of circumstantial evidence, impacting appellate strategies in criminal cases.

Gujarat High Court upholds acquittal in communal violence case, emphasizing that appellate courts must not interfere unless guilt is proven beyond reasonable doubt.

Madras High Court upholds acquittal, holding that confession-led recovery of weapons lacks evidentiary value without independent witness corroboration or identification.

Punjab and Haryana High Court holds that victims may appeal acquittals directly under Section 372 CrPC without seeking special leave under Section 378(4), affirming Supreme Court's interpretation.

Gujarat High Court affirms that appellate courts must uphold acquittals unless guilt is the only reasonable conclusion, emphasizing unbroken circumstantial evidence chains.

Chhattisgarh High Court upholds acquittal in homicide case, emphasizing that appellate courts must not reverse acquittals unless guilt is the only possible conclusion.