Benefit of doubt is given to whom?
Show Hint
- Accused
- Prosecutor
- Judge
- Police
The Correct Option is A
Solution and Explanation
1. In criminal law, the principle of "benefit of doubt" ensures that if there is reasonable doubt about the accused's guilt, the benefit is given to the accused.
2. This stems from the presumption of innocence until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
3. It does not apply to the prosecutor, judge, or police.
Therefore, the correct answer is (1) Accused.
Top TS LAWCET Legal Studies Questions
- Which international agreement aims to combat climate change by limiting global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels?
- Defense by an accused person of having been elsewhere at the time an alleged offense was committed is called as
- Which type of tort involves causing harm to someone's reputation through spoken words?
- Which landmark case dealt with the issue of "marriage after conversion" and declared it illegal under Personal Law?
- Intellectual Property law protects an invention by grant of .........
Top TS LAWCET Judiciary of India Questions
- When was the Supreme Court of India inaugurated?
- The following person is responsible for investigating and resolving complaints from the members of the public against any public organization or department or any public servant.
Directions: Read the following passage and answer the questions given below:
The constitutional system entrusts the judiciary with administration of justice, including adjudication of disputes and interpretation of laws between citizens and the State and States inter se, between the Union and a State. The courts are independent of the Executive and the Legislature and the Judges are free under a constitutional guarantee. The pyramid of courts is protected by the Constitution. At the floor level are the subordinate courts under the control of the High Courts. The judges of the High Courts are not under any other authority except the Constitution and their judgments can be modified or reversed only by the Supreme Court which declares the law and adjudicates disputes binding on all institutions of national life. Article 141 vests the Supreme Court of India with plenary power in this regard. Indeed, the Indian courts at the higher levels have the power even to declare legislation passed by the state legislatures and Parliament ultra vires of the Constitution. In short, the Indian judiciary enjoys an authority which is the summation of the Court of Appeal and the House of Lords in England and the Supreme Court of the United States, perhaps more. Thus, in a broad sense, justice, a supreme value under our supreme lex, is primarily entrusted to the court system in India. While the courts are independent of the executive, they are not independent of the nation or the Constitution. It is accountable to the nation and works under the Constitution. All power, including judicial power, is a people’s trust. That is why the goal of social revolution assured by Part - III which enunciates Fundamental Rights and Part-IV which articulates the Directive Principles of State Policy has to be shared not shunned, by the judiciary. The dynamic Rule of Law is an instrument of social change and the judicial process must effectuate this transformation in the social order. It must defend the Fundamental Rights of citizens and Human Rights of persons to the extent the Constitution gives expression. It must protect the basic structure of the Constitution itself and pave the way for social revolution by upholding legislative measures and executive projects designed to achieve the national objective. The unity of India is also symbolized by the unified judicature with the Supreme Court at the apex. Dr. Ambedkar described the Indian judicial system as ”one single integrated judiciary having jurisdiction
and providing remedies in all cases arising under the Constitutional law, the civil or the criminal law.” The progressive march of the na-
tion, its integrity and unity, its guarantee of legality and equality are in the hands of the judiciary in a large sense; and, functionally
speaking, the court’s performance has to be judged by the measure of success which has attended upon its fulfilment of this expectation.
Indeed, the cornerstone of the nation, the major pillar of its stability and, the orderly course of its progress depends in substantial measure upon the judicial process- the system and the cadres which work with the system. Social justice is the end; judicial justice is the means; the legislative and executive operations are human engineering, and together the three branches of government have to work in comity so that the Constitution may fulfil what the founding fathers designed. Of course, in the final analysis, it is the people themselves who wield power and authority and a Constitution which is not activated by vigilant popular pressure cannot save a sinking nation. The price of a successful Constitution is constant commitment to the people, not perfect manipulation of legal clauses.As per the author, what should be the yardstick to measure the success of the Judiciary?
- Who was the 16\textsuperscript{th Chief Justice of India?}
- Who was the first Chief Justice of Telangana High Court?
Top TS LAWCET Questions
- Which international agreement aims to combat climate change by limiting global warming to well below 2 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels?
- Defense by an accused person of having been elsewhere at the time an alleged offense was committed is called as
- Which type of tort involves causing harm to someone's reputation through spoken words?
- Which landmark case dealt with the issue of "marriage after conversion" and declared it illegal under Personal Law?
- Intellectual Property law protects an invention by grant of .........