What standard must a prosecutor meet in criminal proceedings according to Evidence Act 1995, Section 141?

In criminal proceedings, the standard that a prosecutor must meet, as outlined in the Evidence Act 1995, Section 141, is "beyond reasonable doubt." This is the highest standard of proof in the legal system, reflecting the principle that in criminal cases, the stakes are significantly high, involving the possibility of loss of liberty and even severe penalties for the accused. This standard requires that the evidence presented establishes that there is no reasonable doubt in the minds of a rational person regarding the guilt of the defendant.

While other standards such as the preponderance of evidence or balance of probabilities are used in civil cases, the criminal standard requires a greater level of certainty due to the serious nature of the offenses and the consequences that may follow for the accused. The requirement for proof beyond reasonable doubt serves as a safeguard against wrongful convictions by ensuring that the evidence must be compelling and convincing enough to eliminate any reasonable doubts about the accused's guilt.

Hence, the choice indicating "beyond reasonable doubt" accurately reflects the rigorous criteria a prosecutor must satisfy in criminal matters as mandated by the Evidence Act.