The single judge bench of the Patna High Court held that the question of exercising discretionary power of granting the benefit of doubt does not arise when the evidence on record is silent in respect of the role of the accused persons.
Brief Facts:
The factual matrix of the case is that the complainant alleged that his mother-in-law was cremated in the land of his Sadahu and when the informant and his sadahu arrived at the place for taking Asthi Kalash, the accused along with his associates wrongfully restrained them and assaulted the informant by Lathi on his hand and also tried to commit his murder. The charge sheet was filed under Sections 341, 322, 307, 504, 506/34 of the Indian Penal Code. However, the trial court acquitted the accused person on the benefit of doubt.
The present revision petition filed by the Petitioner states that acquittal based on the benefit of doubt casts a stigma on their reputation and the said phrase should be declared to be expunged from the impugned order.
Issue before the court:
“whether an order of acquittal on the basis of benefit of doubt casts a stigma on the accused or not and secondly when the prosecution failed to prove the charge against the accused persons as well as the involvement of the accused persons in the alleged offence, they should be only acquitted or “Honourably Acquitted” by the Trial Court.”
Observations of the court:
The Hon’ble Court observed that Sections 227, 235, 248, 255, and 330 of the Code of Criminal Procedure use the term "acquittal" under the Cr.P.C. Once more, Sections 227, 239, and 245 of the Cr.P.C. use the term "discharge." The Code of Criminal Procedure had no mention of either "benefit of doubt" or "honourable acquittal."
It was furthermore observed that when it seems from the evidence on record that there are two points of view—one supporting the prosecution and the other supporting the defense—the Trial Court must decide whether to provide the accused the benefit of the doubt. As a result, the question of who gets the benefit of the doubt becomes apparent. In this situation, if the accused is found not guilty, he is entitled to the benefit of the doubt. But the accused will just be declared innocent if there isn't any proof at all against them. When all available information about the accused persons' involvement is utterly quiet, the issue of whether to exercise the discretionary authority of providing the benefit of the doubt is not raised.
Based on these considerations, the court was of the view that there exists no evidence against the accused persons. Therefore, the words “benefit of doubt” are treated to be expunged from the judgment of the Trial Court.
The decision of the court:
With the above direction, the court allowed the present petition.
Case Title: Sushil Kumar Choudhary Vs The State of Bihar
Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Bibek Chaudhuri
Case No.: Criminal Revision No. 1351 of 2018
Advocate for the Petitioner: Ms. Shama Sinha
Advocate for the Respondent: Mr. Sunil Kumar Pandey Mr. Ajay Kumar Jha
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
