Why do courts acquit criminals/accused?

 

Why do courts acquit criminals/accused?

Why is it in the news?

As per the news item published in the reputed Newspaper at Indore, the court acquitted three accused charged with murder and kidnapping of a 13 year old son of a medical shop owner. It was contended that most of the witnesses turned hostile and so the court acquitted the accused. The mother of the dead son was in the precinct of the court and she started sobbing but the accused came out with their smiling faces. Thus, the boy, who was killed, did not get justice even after his death.

Introduction

1.Once a crime is committed, the Police register FIR. Investigation goes on. 

• The investigation of an offence consists of proceeding of the investigating officer to the spot, ascertainment of facts and circumstances of the case, discovery and arrest of the suspected offenders, the examinations of various accused and the search of places or seizure of things considered necessary for the investigation and finally, formation of the opinion as to whether on the basis of materials collected, there is a case to present accused before the magistrate for trials and if so, taking the necessary steps by filing of a charge sheet under section 173 of crpc.

2.If there is sufficient evidence, the investigating officer produces a charge sheet in the court. The court starts the trial proceedings whereby examination chief, cross examination and re-examination of the witnesses, complainants and accused take place. The relevant documents are exhibited in the court of law before the accused. The Judge either convicts or acquits the accused on the basis of evidence brought before him. 

3.If there is sufficient evidence, the court convicts the accused as per the provision of Indian Penal court. If the court is not satisfied with the evidence brought before it, it may acquit the accused. 

Causes of the acquittal of the accused 

The acquittal of an accused can be attributed to the complexities of so many factors. These are -

• Insufficient evidence- If the prosecution fails to establish the guilt of the accused on the basis of insufficient evidence incriminating the accused, the court can acquit an accused. 

• Reasonable doubt- It is the duty of prosecution to prove the involvement of the accused in the crime beyond reasonable doubt. If the defence successfully introduces doubt about the involvement of the accused in the case, the court can give a verdict in favour of the accused by acquitting him. 

• Illegal evidence - If the court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution has obtained evidence unlawfully, it may not admit that illegal evidence in the court and this may lead to acquittal of the accused.

• False confessions - If defence proves that the confession of the accused was obtained by coercion, temptation, allurement or under duress, the court may not admit those confessions by the accused and this may lead to acquittal.

• Credibility of witnesses - If witnesses are inconsistent, biased , and their statements are contradicted by other evidence, it may create scepticism in the mind of the judge and he may acquit the accused because of the lack of accuracy among witnesses. 

• Failure in identification of unknown accused and stolen goods may lead to acquittal of accused.

• Alibi - If the defence successfully establishes the fact that the accused were far off from the place of occurrence of crime and it was not humanly possible to reach the place where the crime occurred, the court may presume that the accused are not involved in the commission of crime.

• If the expert testimony is challenged by the defence and their methodology or expert testimony is successfully impeached, the court may presume that the expert's testimony were vitiated and so it may acquit the accused. 

• Lack of jurisdiction- on account of lack of jurisdiction, the court can also acquit and accuse.

• Statutes of limitations -  The law dictates a specific time limit within which charges must be found. If the prosecution brings charges after the statute of limitation has expired, the accused may be acquitted due to the legal time limit. 

• Poor investigation - Investigation is the process of linking the chain of circumstances under which the crime occurred and the crime detected. If the Investigating Officer fails to establish the link of the occurrence and the detection of the crime and if there is a missing link, the court may acquit the accused. 

• Procedural violations - failure to adhere to legal procedure during evidence collection, statement of witnesses, arrest, searches can render evidence inadmissible in the court. 

• Political influence - Pressure from higher authorities or political masters can compromise the independence and impartiality of the investigation leading to the acquittal of the accused. 

• Resourceful and powerful accused - Sometimes accused are so powerful politically and economically that they exert enormous pressure upon witnesses, the police and the court. Moreover, these powerful accused hire reputed lawyers to defend their case. While the complainant and his government advocate can not match the legal knowledge and expertise of defence lawyers. This leads to the acquittal of the accused. 

• In addition, lack of expertise of the investigating officer, procedural violation, inadequate training and prejudice of the investigating officer are other factors for the acquittal of accused. 

Impact of acquittal of the accused on the society 

Society is disturbed whenever wrongful convictions take place or guilty individuals are acquitted. This leads to the erosion of public trust in law enforcement. The confidence of people in the criminal justice system is also shaken. Law and order situation worsens. Anarchy prevails. The prestige of police ebbs in the eyes of people. 

Conclusion

Acquittals of an accused occur on account of several factors. It is therefore pertinent that the comprehensive legal procedure is followed. The rights of the accused are safeguarded. The evidence is collected and scrutinised before producing them into the court of law so that the court can trust them. It must be remembered that as per the jurisprudence, every accused is innocent until proven guilty by the court. Efforts should be made to cross examine witnesses and accused in such a way that the court is satisfied with the collection of evidence and its authenticity.