The Supreme Court has restored the acquittal of Darshan Kumar in a 1995 murder case from Himachal Pradesh, holding that the High Court was not justified in overturning the Trial Court's judgment without first demonstrating that the acquittal was legally perverse. The Court emphasized that when two reasonable views are possible, an appellate court should not replace the Trial Court's findings with its own merely because it reaches a different conclusion.
Background of the Case
The case arose from Crime No. 99 of 1995, in which the prosecution alleged that Darshan Kumar and another accused committed the murder of a man following a dispute over repayment of a loan. The prosecution claimed the deceased was strangulated, smothered and attacked with a knife. Since there were no eyewitnesses, the prosecution relied entirely on circumstantial evidence, including alleged recoveries and the "last seen" theory.
During the trial, the prosecution examined 22 witnesses. However, the Trial Court found several weaknesses in the evidence. It questioned the credibility of important witnesses, doubted the alleged recoveries, and held that the prosecution had failed to establish an unbroken chain of circumstances proving guilt beyond reasonable doubt. The Trial Court therefore acquitted the accused.
The High Court later reversed the acquittal after re-appreciating the evidence and convicted the appellant, leading to the present appeal before the Supreme Court.
Court's Observations
A Bench of Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Prasanna B. Varale examined whether the High Court had correctly interfered with the acquittal.
The Bench noted that the High Court had merely described the Trial Court's findings as "perverse" without explaining which specific findings were legally unsustainable.
The Court observed,
"When the view expressed by the Trial Court is either the possible or plausible one, the High Court should not replace the Trial Court's view with its view."
The Supreme Court also found several circumstances that supported the Trial Court's reasoning. It noted improvements in the testimony of a key witness, unexplained delay in registration of the FIR despite the informant returning home the same night, and doubts surrounding the alleged recoveries. The Bench further observed that the DNA examination did not conclusively connect the blood found on the recovered shirt with the crime.
Referring to settled principles governing appeals against acquittal, the Court reiterated that an acquittal carries a "double presumption" in favour of the accused. Therefore, an appellate court must exercise greater caution before reversing such a judgment.
Decision
Allowing the appeal, the Supreme Court set aside the High Court's judgment and restored the acquittal recorded by the Trial Court. It directed that Darshan Kumar be released forthwith unless required in any other case.
Pending applications were also disposed of.
Case Details
Case Title: Darshan Kumar v. State of Himachal Pradesh
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. 921 of 2015
Judge: Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice Prasanna B. Varale
Decision Date: July 22, 2026
 chief. Eknath Shinde – Shiv Sena leader-300x169.webp)
