Rajasthan High Court Grants 'Honourable Acquittal', Says 'Benefit Of Doubt' Or 'No Evidence' Improper Where Charges Not Proved

Rajasthan High Court honourably acquitted two sister-in-laws in a cruelty case observing that while granting acquittal the use of terms "benefit of doubt" and "in absence of evidence" by trial court and revisional court was improper especially when prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charges.The bench of Justice Anoop Kumar Dhand in his order held:"In the instant case also, the prosecution has miserably failed to prove the charges levelled against the petitioners on the basis of prosecution evidence led against them, but the Trial Court has given “benefit of doubt”, while acquitting them, whereas the Revisional Court has acquitted them “in absence of evidence”. Once both the Courts below were of the considered opinion that there was no evidence against the petitioners, then certainly, the judgment of honourable acquittal could have been passed instead of giving the “benefit of doubt” or “in absence of evidence”. Both these terminologies would certainly affect future careerf the petitioners". It further observed that even though the concepts of “honourably acquittal”, “acquittal of blame”, “fully acquittal”, were unknown to CrPC, an honourable acquittal may be where the court definitively concluded, based on a full-fledged trial and appreciation of evidence, that the accused had not committed the crime.The Court highlighted that such acquittal was very different from arriving at that finding based on some lacuna in the prosecution case or in the leading of evidence or due to non-availability of credible evidence. In such a case, the accused was not convicted by giving him benefit of doubt. “It is difficult to define exactly what is the meaning of these terms. When the accused is acquitted after full consideration of prosecution evidence and when the prosecution miserably fails to prove the charges levelled against the accused, it can be said that the accused is “honourably acquitted”.The Court was hearing a petition filed by sister-in-laws who were implicated in a matrimonial case filed against their brother along with other family members, in which eventually these two were acquitted by the trial court. However, in the order the court mentioned acquittal by giving “benefit of doubt”. Petition was filed by them before the revisional court with the prayer for deleting the words “benefit of doubt”, contending that they were preparing for competitive exams and the phrase would impact their recruitment opportunities. The revisional court deleted the words, however added “in the absence of evidence”. This order was challenged by the petitioners. It was argued that these were added without any basis, causing hindrance to their future and career prospects. After hearing the contentions, the Court opined that once the revisional court was of the opinion that there was no evidence against the petitioners, they could have been acquitted “honourably” instead of “acquittal in the absence of evidence”. While highlighting that these terms like “honourably acquittal” have evolved based on judicial pronouncement, without finding mention in the law, the Court gave an example of a person who was charged for misappropriation of money. It was observed, “if the court comes to a clear conclusion that the person has not committed misappropriation and has not defalcated money, it amounts to a clean chit…However, if the court holds that charge of misappropriation is not proved on the account of weak prosecution case or weak evidence and therefore it is not possible to conclusively record finding about the commission of offence, the acquittal which may follow in such circumstances cannot be said to be an honourable acquittal.”In this background, the Court held that in the present matter too, the prosecution failed to prove the charges against the petitioners. Once both the courts below were satisfied that there was no evidence against the petitioners, the acquittal could have been given honourably. Accordingly, the petition was allowed and the words were expunged in the order of the revisional court. Title: Nishi Mishra & Anr. v State of RajasthanCitation: 2026 LiveLaw (Raj) 164Click Here To Read/Download Here

Rajasthan High Court Grants 'Honourable Acquittal', Says 'Benefit Of Doubt' Or 'No Evidence' Improper Where Charges Not Proved

Nupur Agrawal

Tags