Acquittal based on benefit of doubt and Honorable Acquittal

The mere fact of an acquittal would not suffice but rather it would depend on whether it is a clean acquittal based on the total absence of evidence or in the criminal jurisprudence
The mere fact of an acquittal would not suffice but rather it would depend on whether it is a clean acquittal based on the total absence of evidence or in the criminal jurisprudence
court building, court house, judge-2729260.jpg

Introduction:

The Supreme Court has held that a public employer can reject a candidate as unsuitable if he had, in the past, been acquitted of a serious crime merely on the benefit of doubt.

STATE OF RAJASTHAN & ORS. VERSUS LOVE KUSH MEENA  

[Civil Appeal No.3894 of 2020]

  • A candidate was not appointed after qualifying the recruitment test of constable in Rajasthan Police Service based on its criminal record.
  • It was found that, though he was acquitted, the charges against him were not of a trivial nature but were serious offences and the candidate was not acquitted by the Court honourably.

Ruling in this regard

  • The mere fact of an acquittal would not suffice but rather it would depend on whether it is a clean acquittal based on the total absence of evidence or in the criminal jurisprudence requiring the case to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, that parameter having not been met, the benefit of the doubt has been granted to the accused.
  • An acquittal on the benefit of the doubt is quite different from an honourable acquittal. A person should be honourably acquitted of a heinous crime to be considered eligible for public employment.
  • Besides, acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically entitle a candidate for appointment to the post.

The term ‘honourable acquittal’ was also considered in UT, Chandigarh Administration & Ors. V. Pradeep Kumar &Anr. It was stated that acquittal in a criminal case was not conclusive for suitability of the candidate. It could not be inferred from an acquittal or discharge that the person was falsely involved or has no criminal antecedents.

In Inspector General of Police V. S Samuthiram, it was held that an accused who is acquitted after full consideration of the prosecution evidence, and prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges against the accused, it can be said that he was honourably acquittal.

 

Difference between Acquittal based on benefit of doubt and Honourable Acquittal

There exists a thin line between “Acquittal” and “Honourable acquittal”.

 

 

 

Acquittal based on benefit of doubt

Honorable Acquittal

 

This acquittal is on the basis of benefit of the doubt.

 It is a clean acquittal based on the total absence of evidence.

This is the principle of Criminal Justice System

The term Honorable acquittal was coined by Indian jurisprudence

Ian accused though he was acquitted, the charges against him were not of a trivial nature but were serious offences and the candidate was not acquitted by the Court honorably.

 

An accused who is acquitted after full consideration of the prosecution evidence and prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges levelled against the accused, it can possibly be said that the accused was honorably acquitted.

 

 

Share:

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *