The phrase Honourable Acquittal is neither defined in Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) nor defined in Indian Penal Code (IPC). However, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in a plethora of cases has deliberated on the issue (of honourable acquittal) to clarify the concept and its wide ramifications
1. Introduction
Acquittals play a crucial role in the criminal justice system, ensuring that individuals are not convicted without sufficient evidence to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. While an acquittal signals the end of criminal proceedings in favour of the defendant, it is not a declaration of innocence, nor does it protect from civil liability.
The principle of acquittal emphasizes fairness and the protection of individual rights within the criminal justice system. And this is precisely where the concept of honourable acquittal gathers importance.
1.1 Definition of Acquittal
An acquittal is a decision made by a judge at the end of a criminal trial, stating that the defendant is not guilty of the offence charged. It signifies that the evidence presented during the trial was insufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt. An acquittal can occur at any stage of the trial, including during pre-trial proceedings, after presenting evidence, or at the conclusion of the trial.
In other words, an acquittal in criminal courts refers to a formal legal judgment that a defendant is not guilty of the criminal charges brought against them.
1.1.1 How Acquittal functions in the Criminal Justice System in India?
In the Indian criminal justice system, an acquittal functions in the following ways:
- Burden of Proof: The prosecution carries the burden of proving the accused’s guilt. If the evidence is insufficient or not convincing enough to meet the standard of proof (beyond a reasonable doubt), the court will acquit the accused.
- Protection of Rights: An acquittal ensures that individuals are not wrongfully punished for crimes they did not commit, maintaining the principle that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty.
- Double Jeopardy: According to Article 20(2) of the Indian Constitution, once a person is acquitted in a criminal case, they cannot be tried again for the same offense, which is a protection against double jeopardy.
Article 20(2) in Constitution of India
(2) No person shall be prosecuted and punished for the same offence more than once.
- Appeals: While an acquittal is a verdict of “not guilty,” the prosecution has the right to appeal an acquittal in a higher court if they believe the decision was erroneous.
In essence, an acquittal in India signifies that the accused is legally cleared of the charges, and the judgment is considered final unless appealed by the prosecution.
1.2 Definition of Honourable Acquittal
An honourable acquittal is a legal term that refers to a verdict in which the defendant is found not guilty, and the acquittal is accompanied by a statement that the defendant’s actions were in fact justifiable or honourable. This type of acquittal may not only conclude that the defendant is innocent of the charges but may also acknowledge that their behaviour or actions were morally or ethically acceptable, depending upon the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case.
In some contexts, an honourable acquittal can be granted to individuals in military or public service, where the defendant is not only exonerated but also praised for their character or service. It is a way of clearing the person’s name while also maintaining their dignity and reputation.
This is distinct from a standard acquittal, which simply means the defendant is not guilty, without the additional recognition of honour or justification.
2. What does an Honourable Acquittal entail?
Honourable acquittal in a criminal case refers to an acquittal in which the defendant is found not guilty in a way that reflects positively on their character or reputation. In essence, it suggests that the defendant was acquitted of the charges not only because of a lack of evidence or legal technicalities, but also in a manner that maintains or restores their honour.
An honourable acquittal therefore entails:
- Clear Exoneration: The acquittal is based on a finding that the defendant was innocent of the alleged offence(s). This is distinct from a not guilty verdict that might arise from insufficient evidence or procedural reasons.
- Restoration of Reputation: An honourable acquittal is one that clears the defendant’s name in a way that restores their social standing, dignity, and respect in the community. It reflects a judgment that the accused acted lawfully and with integrity.
- Public Acknowledgment: In some cases, an honourable acquittal might involve a public declaration of the defendant’s innocence, which helps to undo any harm caused to their reputation during the trial.
3. Difference between Acquittal and Honourable Acquittal
The primary difference between an honourable acquittal and a standard acquittal lies in the connotations regarding the defendant’s reputation and the manner in which the acquittal is granted.
1) An acquittal occurs when a defendant is found not guilty of the charges against them. This can happen for various reasons, such as insufficient evidence, lack of legal merit, or a failure to prove guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. WHEREAS an honourable acquittal goes beyond simply finding the defendant not guilty. An honourable acquittal signifies that the defendant is exonerated in a manner that restores or preserves their honour and dignity. It simply means that the defendant was not only legally innocent but also that their actions were above reproach and that they acted with integrity.
2) A standard acquittal does not necessarily address the defendant’s reputation. In simpler terms, the court only concluded that the prosecution did not meet its burden of proof. The defendant may still face stigma or harm to their reputation, especially if the charges were serious. For instance, a defendant could be acquitted because the prosecution’s evidence was weak, but the court might not have made a clear judgment about the defendant’s character or integrity. WHEREAS an honourable acquittal emphasizes the defendant’s character, ensuring that their reputation is cleared in the eyes of the public. It is not just a legal victory but a moral or ethical validation as well. For instance, an honourable acquittal may be issued in cases where the court explicitly recognizes the defendant’s good character and exonerates them in a way that publicly restores their social standing.
4. Legal Grounds for Honourable Acquittal
An honourable acquittal refers to a legal verdict where a defendant is found not guilty, and the acquittal is recognized as being not only lawful but also honourable. It generally signifies that the defendant was acquitted on substantial grounds, with the court acknowledging that there was no criminal intent, wrongdoing, or that the evidence presented was insufficient to establish guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.
Given below are some of the major grounds for an honourable acquittal- [Please note that this is not an exhaustive list, and that each legal case has its own unique set of facts and circumstances which may determine whether the case is fit for honourable acquittal or not.]
4.1 False Accusations and Malicious Prosecution
This involves cases where a defendant/accused is acquitted due to malicious, fabricated, or ill-intentioned charges. If the accused can prove that the charges against them were false or malicious, the court may grant an honourable acquittal. This might include cases where:
- The prosecution was based on fabricated evidence or made with malicious intent.
- The charges were intended to damage the individual’s reputation, regardless of their truth.
- The accused has been the victim of a conspiracy or personal vendetta.
4.2 Lack of Evidence and False Claims
The most fundamental ground for an honourable acquittal is that there is a lack of evidence or the evidence presented by the prosecution fails to establish the guilt of the defendant. This also includes cases where charges are dropped or the defendant/ accused is found not guilty due to insufficient or fabricated evidence. This might include situations where:
- The charges were false or fabricated.
- The witnesses or evidence provided by the prosecution were not credible.
- There was a complete absence of incriminating evidence that could suggest any criminal activity by the accused.
4.3 Wrongful Charge
- If it is determined that the defendant was wrongly accused or the charges were based on mistaken facts, the court may issue an honourable acquittal. This can occur when a defendant is charged due to erroneous identification, false testimony, or inadequate investigation.
4.4 Self-Defense
- If the defendant was found to have acted in self-defense (i.e., they were protecting themselves or others from an imminent threat or harm), the court may acquit them. An honourable acquittal in such cases might indicate that the defendant’s actions were justifiable under the law.
4.5 Alibi
- If the defendant presents a credible alibi that places them outside the scene of the crime or otherwise disproves their involvement, and the prosecution cannot refute it, an honourable acquittal can occur.
4.6 Violation of Rights
- A defendant may be acquitted if there is a violation of their constitutional rights. In simpler terms, the violation of a defendant’s rights during criminal proceedings can form a crucial ground for securing an honourable acquittal. Such violations undermine the fairness of the trial process and may result in an acquittal or dismissal of charges.
5. Supreme Court Judgments: Honourable Acquittal in Criminal Cases
The Supreme Court of India in its judgment in Commissioner of Police, New Delhi and Another Vs. Mehar Singh, (2013) 7 SCC 685 held-
25. The expression “honourable acquittal” was considered by this Court in S. Samuthiram [Inspector General of Police v. S. Samuthiram, (2013) 1 SCC 598 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 566 : (2013) 1 SCC (L&S) 229] . In that case this Court was concerned with a situation where disciplinary proceedings were initiated against a police officer. Criminal case was pending against him under Section 509 IPC and under Section 4 of the Eve-Teasing Act. He was acquitted in that case because of the non-examination of key witnesses. There was a serious flaw in the conduct of the criminal case. Two material witnesses turned hostile. Referring to the judgment of this Court in RBI v. Bhopal Singh Panchal [(1994) 1 SCC 541 : 1994 SCC (L&S) 594 : (1994) 26 ATC 619] , where in somewhat similar fact situation, this Court upheld a bank's action of refusing to reinstate an employee in service on the ground that in the criminal case he was acquitted by giving him benefit of doubt and, therefore, it was not an honourable acquittal, this Court held that the High Court was not justified in setting aside the punishment imposed in the departmental proceedings. This Court observed that the expressions “honourable acquittal”, “acquitted of blame” and “fully exonerated” are unknown to the Criminal Procedure Code or the Penal Code. They are coined by judicial pronouncements. It is difficult to define what is meant by the expression “honourably acquitted”. This Court expressed that when the accused is acquitted after full consideration of the prosecution case and the prosecution miserably fails to prove the charges levelled against the accused, it can possibly be said that the accused was honourably acquitted.
26. In light of the above, we are of the opinion that since the purpose of the departmental proceedings is to keep persons, who are guilty of serious misconduct or dereliction of duty or who are guilty of grave cases of moral turpitude, out of the department, if found necessary, because they pollute the department, surely the above principles will apply with more vigour at the point of entry of a person in the police department i.e. at the time of recruitment. If it is found by the Screening Committee that the person against whom a serious case involving moral turpitude is registered is discharged on technical grounds or is acquitted of the same charge, but the acquittal is not honourable, the Screening Committee would be entitled to cancel his candidature. Stricter norms need to be applied while appointing persons in a disciplinary force because public interest is involved in it.
In its judgment in Union Territory Chandigarh Administration And Others Vs. Pradeep Kumar And Another, (2018) 1 SCC 797 the Supreme Court of India observed-
“10. The acquittal in a criminal case is not conclusive of the suitability of the candidates in the post concerned. If a person is acquitted or discharged, it cannot always be inferred that he was falsely involved or he had no criminal antecedents. Unless it is an honourable acquittal, the candidate cannot claim the benefit of the case. What is honourable acquittal, was considered by this Court in Inspector General of Police v. S. Samuthiram [Inspector General of Police v. S.Samuthiram, (2013) 1 SCC 598 : (2013) 1 SCC (Cri) 566 : (2013) 1 SCC (L&S) 229] , in which this Court held as under: (SCC p. 609, para 24)
“24. The meaning of the expression “honourable acquittal” came up for consideration before this Court in RBI v. Bhopal Singh Panchal [RBI v. Bhopal Singh Panchal, (1994) 1 SCC 541 : 1994 SCC (L&S) 594] . In that case, this Court has considered the impact of Regulation 46(4) dealing with honourable acquittal by a criminal court on the disciplinary proceedings. In that context, this Court held that the mere acquittal does not entitle an employee to reinstatement in service, the acquittal, it was held, has to be honourable. The expressions “honourable acquittal”, “acquitted of blame”, “fully exonerated” are unknown to the Code of Criminal Procedure or the Penal Code, which are coined by judicial pronouncements. It is difficult to define precisely what is meant by the expression “honourably acquitted”. When the accused is acquitted after full consideration of prosecution evidence and that the prosecution had miserably failed to prove the charges levelled against the accused, it can possibly be said that the accused was honourably acquitted.”
11. …….
12. …….
13. It is thus well settled that acquittal in a criminal case does not automatically entitle him for appointment to the post. Still, it is open to the employer to consider the antecedents and examine whether he is suitable for appointment to the post. From the observations of this Court in Mehar Singh [Commr. of Police v. Mehar Singh, (2013) 7 SCC 685 : (2013) 3 SCC (Cri) 669 : (2013) 2 SCC (L&S) 910] and Parvez Khan [State of M.P. v. Parvez Khan, (2015) 2 SCC 591 : (2015) 1 SCC (L&S) 544] cases, it is clear that a candidate to be recruited to the police service must be of impeccable character and integrity. A person having criminal antecedents will not fit in this category. Even if he is acquitted or discharged, it cannot be presumed that he was honourably acquitted/completely exonerated. The decision of the Screening Committee must be taken as final unless it is shown to be mala fide. The Screening Committee also must be alive to the importance of the trust reposed in it and must examine the candidate with utmost character.”
6. Conclusion
An honourable acquittal generally means the defendant is seen as having acted lawfully or that the allegations against them were unfounded, without any stigma of guilt attached. It is important to note that the specifics of the grounds for acquittal can vary depending upon the facts and circumstances of the case along with the applicable law and jurisdiction.