One of the principles of criminal proceedings is the presumption of innocence. At the legislative level, it is enshrined in article 49 of the Constitution and Art. 14 Code of Criminal Procedure. Consider its content. 
Presumption of innocence
how establishes art. 14 CPC, the subject accused of a criminal offense is recognized not guilty until his guilt is proved in the manner prescribed by procedural legislation. The established fact of a person’s involvement in the act should be recorded in the court verdict, which entered into force.
Accused / suspect under the provisions h. 2 tbsp. 14 CPCshould not prove innocence. This burden, as well as the obligation to refute the arguments presented in defense of the subject, rests with the prosecution.
How does h. 3 tbsp. 14 CPC, any doubts about the involvement of the subject in the act, which can not be eliminated in the manner prescribed by the procedural legislation, are interpreted in his favor.
Part 4 of the norm prohibits sentencing on the basis of assumptions.
Art. 14 Code of Criminal Procedure with comments
The essence of the presumption of innocence is to comply with the rule, which by default establishes the assumption that a person is innocent of a crime, unless proven otherwise. Moreover, the probability can be both high and close to zero.
The presumption is considered an assumption of specific facts. Accordingly, it can be both imperative and dispositive in nature. However, in any case, it is a legal fact. 
Guilty
Principle enshrined Art. 14 CPCare conditionally divided into 3 assumptions. The first and key is the assumption that the person is innocent until proven otherwise. At the same time, citizen’s involvement should be established in the manner prescribed by law.
In decisions handed down during the proceedings in respect of a particular defendant, the court is not entitled to use language that indicates the guilt of other persons. Moreover, as explained in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Armed Forces No. 1 of 1996, when considering the case, it is necessary to take a procedural decision on the citizen's involvement in the crime and reflect it in the sentence. In this case, the guilt of the person will be considered established after the entry into force of the decision.
Limited Principle
It takes place upon termination of the case / prosecution due to non-rehabilitating circumstances. These include, in particular:
- Expiration of the statute of limitations.
- The death of the accused / suspect, unless the continuation of the proceedings is necessary for the rehabilitation of the person.
- Amnesty.
- Reconciliation of the parties.
- Failure to reach the age at which the subject can be prosecuted under the Criminal Code.
- Active remorse.
Persons suspected / accused of acts admit guilt in such cases and have no right to rehabilitation. At the same time, as indicated in the plenary decision of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation No. 18 of 1996, the decision to close the case cannot substitute for the sentence imposed by the court. Accordingly, this document is not recognized as an act establishing the involvement of the subject in an unlawful act in the sense of the provisions of article 49 of the Constitution. 
Meanwhile, the dismissal of the case due to a change in the situation, although it provides for the release of the citizen from responsibility and punishment, is considered in practice as a statement of the fact that he committed a crime based on the materials of the investigation. Accordingly, the termination of production does not provide for rehabilitation, that is, the question of the involvement of a person remains open.
In this regard, we can conclude that the presumption, fixed in Art. 14 CPC, fully valid only in case of proof of guilt by the court making the relevant decision in the form of a sentence. The key provision of the principle, therefore, is the fact of recognition of a citizen’s involvement in the court session.
Nuances
If a guilty verdict ascertaining the guilt of a person was imposed with violations of the rules of jurisdiction, rights to defense, norms of the CPC, not in the composition of the court, the presumption is also limited. A citizen in such cases, however, cannot be considered guilty.
Legal force of the judgment
This is another element of the principle provided for in Art. 14 CPC.
The entry into force of a sentence is referred to in Part 1 of Article 390 of the Code. According to the norm, the decision becomes effective at the end of the period allotted for appeal, - 10 days. Accordingly, 10 days after the final verdict is passed, the citizen officially becomes guilty of the crime. Consequently, the operation of the principle enshrined in Art. 14 CPCis terminated.
Important point
It must be said that the provisions of paragraph 1 of Article 14 are also applied in cases where a measure of restraint is taken to a citizen - placement in custody. In addition, the presumption applies to situations where the issue of extradition of a citizen for prosecution against him is being decided. 
Explanations on this issue are given in the Resolution of the Plenum of the Armed Forces No. 11 of 2012. The document, in particular, indicates that the court cannot predetermine the issue of the citizen’s involvement / non-involvement in an act in respect of which a request for extradition is provided or by the law enforcement bodies of the Russian Federation received such a request.
Duty of proof
The provisions of paragraph 2 of Article 14 may apply both individually and collectively. However, in case of violation of any of them, a sentence or other procedural act (decision), adopted at the pre-trial stage of the proceedings, shall be recognized unlawful.
The obligation to prove innocence presupposes the complete monopoly of the prosecution and defense. The burden of proof arises from the provisions of Article 6 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as well as from the principle of publicity of proceedings.
The obligation to prove innocence gives rise to several particular provisions enshrined in procedural law.
For example, as article 46 establishes (para. 4 para. 2), the suspect may refuse to give explanations and testimonies, and the accused, by virtue of 3 points 4 of part of Art. 47 - to testify.
The witness may not testify against himself, close relatives, husband / wife. 
These provisions indicate that the assumption of innocence is the basis for the refusal of the actual presumption in a number of cases. For example, in a hotel room a person was found to have a package with narcotic substances. It can be assumed that he belongs to this entity, and not to another citizen who previously occupied the same number, or that he was planted by someone. In any case, demanding that this subject express his own version of the appearance of drugs, based on it or on his refusal to give explanations, conclusions about involvement in the trafficking of such substances will be regarded as a violation of the principle provided for in Art. 14 Code of Criminal Procedure.
Doubts about the person's involvement in the act
They are mentioned in part 3 of article 14 Code of Criminal Procedure. All doubts arising in the course of the proceedings must be resolved in the manner prescribed by the procedural legislation. It is, in particular, about investigative and other measures. 
The duty to eliminate all doubts about the circumstances of the case rests with the prosecution. In this case, the court, in the process of making this or that decision, is obliged to clarify all these contradictions and give them a proper legal assessment.