- (1.) (With him, Chandrasekhara Aiyar J.) The only question in this appeal is whether the High Court had in mind the principles we have enunciated about interference under S. 417, Criminal P. C. when it allowed the appeal filed by the State against the acquittal of the appellant. It is, in our opinion, well settled that it is not enough for the High Court to take a different view of the evidence; there must also be substantial and compelling reasons for holding that the trial Court was wrong. 'Almer Singh V. State of Punjab,' AIR 1953 SC 76 at pp. 77-78 (A): and if the trial Court takes a reasonable view of the facts of the case, interference under S. 417 is not justifiable unless there are really, strong reasons for reversing that view, 'Surajpal Singh v. State', AIR 1952 SC 52 at p. 54 (B).
(2.) The appellant was prosecuted under Ss. 302 and 447, I. P. C. for the murder of Aher Jetha Sida. It is not necessary at the moment to set out the facts. It is enough to say that the High Court based its conviction on a retracted confession plus certain circumstances which the learned Judges regarded as corroborative.
(3.) The learned Sessions Judge excluded the confession on the ground that it was neither voluntary nor true. The learned Judge's reasoning about its falsity is weak. We do not think there is material on which a positive finding about its falsity can be reached but when he says that he is not satisfied that it was made voluntarily we find it impossible to hold that that is a view which a judicial mind acting fairly could not reasonably reach.;