It is not the function of the Supreme Court to re-assess evidence and arguments on points of fact, a Bench of Justices AM Sapre and Indu Malhotra held..This principle was emphasised by the Supreme Court while delivering the judgment in the case Satya Raj Singh vs State of Madhya Pradesh while upholding the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The judgment states,.“At the outset, we may take note of one legal principle which consistently reiterated by this Court since inception that it is not the function of this Court to re-assess evidence and an argument on a point of fact which did not prevail with the Courts below cannot avail the appellants in this Court.” [sic].In the instant case, the Appellant and two other accused persons were tried by a court in Katna for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Appellant was found guilty and was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000..The other two accused persons were acquitted by the trial court and no appeal in that regard was filed by the State. Aggrieved by the conviction, the Appellant approached the High Court at Jabalpur, which dismissed his appeal. This prompted the Appellant to approach the Supreme Court..The Appellant presented his case before the Supreme Court and challenged his convictions on the same grounds that were raised before the High Court. He challenged the correctness of the testimonies of the eye-witnesses and argued that there was a delay in registering the FIR and thus, there were inconsistencies in the evidence..The Supreme Court, finding no merit in the appeal, reiterated that the function of the Supreme Court is not to re-assess evidence..Although, having said the same, the Supreme Court perused the evidence only to conclude that the testimonies of the witnesses were consistent and the High Court was right in dismissing the appeal. The Supreme Court also stated that minor contradictions that do not affect the substance of testimony cannot lead to rejection of the entire testimony..“As rightly held by the High Court, some minor contradictions here and there without affecting the substance of their statements could not be made basis to reject their entire testimony. We, therefore, agree with the reasoning of the High Court.”.Finding no ground to interfere with the decision of the High Court, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal..Read the Judgment:
It is not the function of the Supreme Court to re-assess evidence and arguments on points of fact, a Bench of Justices AM Sapre and Indu Malhotra held..This principle was emphasised by the Supreme Court while delivering the judgment in the case Satya Raj Singh vs State of Madhya Pradesh while upholding the judgment of the Madhya Pradesh High Court. The judgment states,.“At the outset, we may take note of one legal principle which consistently reiterated by this Court since inception that it is not the function of this Court to re-assess evidence and an argument on a point of fact which did not prevail with the Courts below cannot avail the appellants in this Court.” [sic].In the instant case, the Appellant and two other accused persons were tried by a court in Katna for murder under Section 302 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The Appellant was found guilty and was sentenced to life imprisonment and a fine of Rs. 1000..The other two accused persons were acquitted by the trial court and no appeal in that regard was filed by the State. Aggrieved by the conviction, the Appellant approached the High Court at Jabalpur, which dismissed his appeal. This prompted the Appellant to approach the Supreme Court..The Appellant presented his case before the Supreme Court and challenged his convictions on the same grounds that were raised before the High Court. He challenged the correctness of the testimonies of the eye-witnesses and argued that there was a delay in registering the FIR and thus, there were inconsistencies in the evidence..The Supreme Court, finding no merit in the appeal, reiterated that the function of the Supreme Court is not to re-assess evidence..Although, having said the same, the Supreme Court perused the evidence only to conclude that the testimonies of the witnesses were consistent and the High Court was right in dismissing the appeal. The Supreme Court also stated that minor contradictions that do not affect the substance of testimony cannot lead to rejection of the entire testimony..“As rightly held by the High Court, some minor contradictions here and there without affecting the substance of their statements could not be made basis to reject their entire testimony. We, therefore, agree with the reasoning of the High Court.”.Finding no ground to interfere with the decision of the High Court, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal..Read the Judgment:
![Not its function to re-assess evidence, Supreme Court [Read Judgment]](http://media.assettype.com/barandbench%2Fimport%2F2019%2F01%2FAM-sapre-and-Indu-Malhotra-3.jpg?w=480&auto=format%2Ccompress&fit=max)
