Question

Consider the following Assertion [A] and Reasoning [R]:
[A] The Supreme Court of India ordinarily does not interfere with order of acquittal passed by the High Court in the favor of accused.
[R] The power vested in the Court under Article 136 of the Constitution is plenary, hence the Court itself set the limits by permitting invocation of this power in very exceptional circumstances.
Choose the most suitable answer from the below given options.

• A. Both [A] and [R] are true and [R] is a correct explanation of [A]
• B. Both [A] and [R] are true but [R] is not a correct explanation of [A]
• C. [A] is true and [R] is false
• D. [A] is false and [R] is true

Hint:

Article 136 powers are vast, but the Supreme Court exercises them sparingly, especially against acquittals.

Answer 1

The Correct Option is A

Step 1: Validity of the Assertion [A].
It is a settled principle of criminal jurisprudence that the Supreme Court ordinarily does not interfere with an order of acquittal, especially when the High Court has appreciated evidence and recorded a finding in favour of the accused. Hence, Assertion [A] is true.
Step 2: Validity of the Reason [R].
Article 136 of the Constitution confers plenary and discretionary powers on the Supreme Court. The Court has, through judicial discipline, restricted the exercise of this power to exceptional cases involving grave miscarriage of justice. Therefore, Reason [R] is also true.
Step 3: Link between [A] and [R].
The self-imposed restraint by the Supreme Court under Article 136 directly explains why it ordinarily refrains from interfering with acquittal orders. Thus, [R] correctly explains [A].
Step 4: Conclusion.
Accordingly, the correct answer is (A).