NEW DELHI: The Delhi High Court has upheld a trial court's order acquitting an accused in a robbery case, saying it could only interfere with the verdict if the findings were "perverse".

Justice Manoj Kumar Ohri, hearing an appeal filed by the prosecution against the November 2014 order of a sessions court acquitting the accused, underlined the principle of "double presumption of innocence" and said the trial court's order was well-reasoned.

In an order dated December 17, the court said, "It is trite law that an appellate court must be slow to interfere in an appeal against acquittal unless the findings of the trial court are shown to be perverse."

"The principle of double presumption of innocence, which operates in favour of an accused after acquittal, is well-settled," it added.

The legal principle of double presumption of innocence operates at two levels. One, under the fundamental principle of criminal jurisprudence that every person shall be presumed innocent unless proven guilty in a court of law, and two, the accused having secured an acquittal, the presumption of innocence is further reinforced, the judge pointed out.

Concurring with the trial court's observation that the Delhi Police was unable to establish the accused's guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, the high court said the order of acquittal was "plausible, well-reasoned and supported by the evidence".