Acquittal in general terms means that the accused is innocent and has not committed the offence

he/she was accused of. The decision of acquittal is given by the judge after inspecting all the
evidence and hearing arguments of the defence and the prosecution. It implies that no evidence
has been brought up to prove that the accused has carried out an offence as per the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973. 

The acquittal procedure is necessary to ensure that nobody is punished for an offence they did
not commit. Further modifications have also given the victim, in addition to the state, to file for
appeals in courts if they feel that the accused has been wrongly acquitted. This measure is an
essential safeguard to the acquittal procedure and is the crux of one of the fundamental principles
of criminal law and the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Landmark Judgments

Mallikarjun Kodagali v. State of Karnataka

In this case, on December 30, 2009, the Parliament had amended Section 372 of the CrPC so
that it now allows the victim to file an appeal against any order passed by the Court, if according
to the victim, the accused was wrongly acquitted, or convicted less stringent, or he/she feels that
the compensation has been inadequate.

The legal representatives of Mallikarjun Kodagali had filed an appeal at the Karnataka High
Court on behalf of Mr. Kodagali who was deceased. The appeal referred to a judgment by the
High Court upholding a decision to acquit an MLA and others alleged to have attacked Kodagali
in Bagalkot. The High Court had dismissed the appeal as the death of Kodagali made the appeal
unmaintainable.

The issue was whether the petitioner should get the benefits of the said amended provision of
CrPC as when the initial judgment was given, no such provision was in force.

Justice M B Lokur while giving out the majority decision said that Section 372 of CrPC which
deals with appeals in respect to acquittal orders should be given a “realistic, liberal, progressive”
interpretation so as to benefit the victim. He further referred to a resolution by the United
Nations General Assembly which held that the victim besides the state shall also be entitled to
present an appeal against the acquittal of the accused.

This was a landmark judgment which recognized the victim’s right to appeal and ruled that the
victim can file for an appeal in case he/she is of the belief that proper sentence has not been
given.
 Champalal Kapoorchand Jain v. Navyug Cloth Stores
Out of 31 dates for a hearing of the case, the complainant was absent on 11 occasions. On the
31st occasion as well, the complainant and his advocate were not present and the judge
concluded the case and gave out the decision.
The Metropolitan Magistrate gave out an order of acquittal to the respondent (who was the
accused in the case) due to the absence of the complainant.
The complainant along with his advocate then went on to file an appeal stating that the advocate
had misheard the upcoming date which was the reason for their absence and challenged the order
of the metropolitan magistrate.
The Court observed that as per the provisions of Section 256, the complainant must be present on
every date of the hearing unless his presence is deemed to be unnecessary by the magistrate,
which wasn’t so in this case. The magistrate had already accused 11 disappearances already. This
provision gives the Magistrate wide powers. He must ensure that the accused gets his right to a
speedy trial as the case cannot go on for perpetuity.
The court did not find any substance in the pleas and dismissed the appeal consequently.
 Difference between Acquittal and Discharge

Acquittal Discharge

1. A person who has been acquitted cannot be
arrested for the same case in which he has
been acquitted by the Court.
2. An acquittal may also result from absence
of the complainant, or withdrawal or a
compounding of offence.
3. An order of acquittal is a judicial decision
taken after full inquiry establishing the
innocence of accused.
4. An acquittal bars second trial on the same
facts and for the same offence, or on the
same facts for any other offence for which
different charges from the one made against
the accused might have been made
under Section 221(1) of CrPC.
1. A discharged person can be rearrested and
committed for a further enquiry.
2. When a Magistrate proceeds with less
serious offence, it amounts to a discharge of
graver charge and the accused can be
directed to be committed.
3. An order of discharge simply implies that
there is no prima facie evidence against the
accused to justify further enquiry in relation
to the charge; such order does not establish
anything regarding the guilt of the accused.
4. A discharge does not bar the institution of
fresh proceedings when new or better
evidence becomes available against the
accused.

Section 221(1) of CrPC– This provides that if a single act or series of acts is of such a nature that
it is doubtful for which of several offences, the accused may be charged the he may be tried at
once: or he may be charged in the alternative with having committed some one of the said
offences.
Difference between acquittal and discharge

 Discharge is defined in Section 227 of the Code. If after hearing

both the parties and examining evidence, the judge believes that
there is no sufficient ground on which the case may move forward
against the accused, he/she shall give an order for discharge and
shall record his/her reasons for doing so. 

Acquittal is defined in Section 232. The judge gives an order of acquittal

after reaching the conclusion that there is no evidence against the accused
and he is not guilty of the commission of the offence.

 Owing to the principles of autrefois acquit and double jeopardy, a

person once acquitted for an offence can not be tried for the same
offence again. However, a person who has been discharged may be
rearrested for further questioning.
 An order for acquittal is given after full inquiry and trial of a case
has been concluded. Its a judicial decision that is given after the
innocence of the accused has been established. However, a person
is discharged because no further evidence could be found to justify
further inquiry against him/ her. The discharge doesn’t prove that a
person is innocent.
 A discharge allows fresh proceedings in case more material evidence
comes up. However, an acquittal does not allow a second trial on
the same offence or a different offence relating to the same facts.