Mahendr

aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Cr
imi
nal
Procedur
eCode–Cr
PCNot
es

QUESTI
ON`
1:-Di
scusst
heRi
ght
sofanar
rest
edper
son?

ANSWER:
-CrPCgivespowerstothepoli
ceforar
rest
ingapersonwi
thsuchpowerCrP.
Cal
so
pr
ovi
desr
ight
stoanarr
estedperson.Ri
ghtsofanarr
estedar
easfol
lows–

1.Righttoknowt hegroundsofarr
est–Sect
ion50(1)–Accor
dingtothisprovi
sion,
every
pol
iceof f
icerorotherper
sonarr
esti
nganypersonwit
houtwar
rantshall
forthwi
thcommuni cat
e
tohimf ul
l par
ti
cular
softheoff
enceforwhi
chhei sar
rest
edoranyothergroundsforsuch
arr
est.

IncaseofUday bhanShukivsStat
eofUP1999Cr LJ,
AllHCheldthatr
ighttobenoti
fi
edof
groundsofarresti
sapreciousri
ghtofthearr
est
edperson.Thi
sall
owshi mtomovetheproper
courtforbai
l
,makeawr i
tpeti
ti
onforhabeascor
pus,ormakeappropr
iatearr
angementsf
orhis
defence.

2.Righttobeinformedoft heprovi
sionforbai
l–Section50(2)–Secti
on50(
2),provi
dest
hat
wher eapoli
ceof f
icerar
restsanypersonotherthanapersonaccusedofanon-bai
labl
eof
fence
withoutwarr
ant ,
heshallinfor
mt hepersonarr
estedthathei
sentit
ledtober
eleasedonbai
land
thathemayar rangeforsureti
esonhi sbehal
f.

3.Righttobet akent omagi st

rat
ewi thoutdel
ay–Sect i
on57–ofCr PC.Itsaysthat,Nopoli
ce
off
icershalldetainincustodyaper sonar r
est
edwi t
houtwarrantforalongerperiodthanunder
al
ltheci r
cumst ancesoft hecaseisreasonable,andsuchperiodshallnot
,intheabsenceofa
specialorderofaMagi st
rateunderSect i
on167,exceedtwentyfourhoursexclusiv
eoft het
ime
necessaryforthej ourneyfr
om theplaceofarresttotheMagi st
rate’
scourt.

Incaseof,Khatri
(II
)vsSt ateofBihar1981SCC, SChasstrongl
yurgedupont heStateandits
poli
cetoensur et
hatthisconst i
tut
ionalandlegal r
equi
rementofbringi
nganar r
estedperson
befor
eajudicialmagistr
atewi thi
n24hour sshoul dbemet.Thisal
lowsmagi str
atestokeepa
checkonthepol i
ceinvestigat
ion.Iti
sessentialthatt
hemagi st
rat
esshouldtrytoenforcethi
s
requi
rementandwhent heyf i
nditdisobeyed,theyshoul
dcomeheav i
lyuponthepoli
ce.

Further
,incaseof ,Shar
ifbai
vsAbdul
Razak,AI
R1961,
SChel
dthati
fapoli
ceoff
icerfai
l
sto
produceanar restedpersonbef
oreamagist
rat
ewi
thi
n24hour
s,heshal
lbehel
dguilt
yof
wrongfuldetention.

1
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

4.Righttoconsul
tLegalPract
iti
oner–Section303-Under
section303iti
sment i
onedthatanypersonaccusedofoffence
beforeaCriminalCour
toragainstwhom proceedi
ngsare
i
nst i
tut
edunderthisCode,mayhav er
ightt
obedef endedbya
pleaderofhi
schoice.

5.Rightt ofreelegal aid–Sect i

on304–Sect ion304pr ov ides
thatwher e,inat rial befor
et heCour tofSession, theaccusedi s
notrepr esentedbyapl eader,andwher eappear stot heCour tthattheaccusedhasnot
suffi
cientmeanst oengageapl eader,t
heCour tshal lassi gnapl eaderforhisdefenceatt he
expenseoft heSt ate.InSukDasv sUnionTer ritoryofAr unachal Pradesh1986, SCC, SChas
heldthatnon- compl ianceoft hi
sr equir
ementorf ailuretoi nformt heaccusedoft hisrightwould
spoilthet ri
alent ail
ingsettingasideoft heconv ictionandsent ence.Ther i
ghtofanaccusedt o
consul thislawy erbegi nsfrom themomentofhi sar r
est .Theconsul tati
onwi t
hthel awyermay
bewi thinthepr esenceofapol i
ceof fi
cer,butnotwi thint hepol i
ceofficer
’sheari
ng.SCal soheld
thatitisthedut yonal l
cour t
sandmagi st
ratest oi nformt hei ndegentper sonabouthi sri
ghtto
getfreel egalaid.

6.Righttobei nfor
medaboutt herighttoinfor
m ofhi sarresttohisrelativ
eorf r
iend–Sect i
on
50A( 1)providesthatoncet hearrestedpersoni sbroughtt othepolicest at
ion,thepolice
off
icermusti nform arelati
veoraf ri
end,oranyot herpersonoft hear rest
edper son’schoice,
abouthisarrest.Hemustal sot el
ltheplacewher ethear restedpersonhasbeenkept .Furt
her,
asperSect i
on50A( 3)hemustnot edownt henameandaddr essoft heper sonwhowas
i
nformedaboutt hearrest.Tomakesur ethatthereisnov iol
ationoft hisri
ght,section50A( 4)
makesi tadut yofthemagi st r
atetov eri
fythattheprovisionsoft hi
ssect i
onwer ecompl i
edwith.
Thisall
owst hear r
estedper sonandhi swellwisherstot akeappropriatelegal stepstosecure
hi
sr el
ease.

7.Rightt obeexaminedbyamedi cal practit

ioner–Whi leSect ion53al l
owsapol i
ceof fi
cert
o
gettheaccusedexami nedbyar egisteredmedi cal practit
ioner, Sect i
on54(1)givestheaccused
arightt ogethi
mselfexami nedbyar egister
edmedi cal pr
actitioner .Accordi
ngt oSection54( 1)
,
whenaper sonwhoi sarr
est ed,whetheronachar georot herwi se,al l
eges,atthetimewhenhe
i
spr oducedbef oreaMagist rat
eoratanyt imedur ing,theper iodofhi sdetenti
oni ncustodythat
theexami nati
onofhisbodywi l
laff
ordev i
dencewhi chwi l
l di
spr ovet hecommi ssi
onbyhi m of
anyof fenceorwhichMagist rat
eshall,ifrequestedbyt hear r
est edper sonsot ododi rectthe
exami nati
onof’thebodyofsuchper sonbyar egisteredmedi cal practit
ionerunlessthe
Magi strat
econsider
sthatther equestismadef orthepur poseofv exati
onordel ayorf or
defeatingtheendsofJustice.

I
ncaseofSheelaBar
sevsSt
ateofMahar
ashtr
a1983SCC,SChel
dthatt
hearr
estedaccused
personmustbei
nfor
medbythemagi
str
ateabouthi
sri
ghtt
obemedical
l
yexaminedinter
msof
Secti
on54(1)
.

2
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

QUESTI
ON2:
-El
abor
atet
het
ri
alofWar
rantofcasesbyaMagi
str
ate?

Answer:
-Ther
ear
etwodi
ff
erentpr
ocedur
espr
escr
ibedf
ort
ri
alofwar
rantcasesbya
Magist
rat
e:

1)Pr
ocedur
eoft
ri
alofwar
rantcasesi
nst
it
utedonapol
i
cer
epor
t.

2)Pr
ocedur
eoft
ri
alofwar
rantcasesi
nst
it
utedot
her
wiset
hanonapol
i
cer
epor
t.

Sect
ions238to243bot hincl
usiv
erel
ateexclusivel
ytothepr
ocedur eoftri
alsincasesi
nit
iat
ed
onpoli
cereportwher
eassect i
ons244to247, bothincl
usi
ve,
relateexclusi
velytot
heprocedure
i
ncasesinit
iat
edotherwisethanonpol
icereport.Secti
on248relatestoboth.

A.
-Casesi
nst
it
utedonapol
i
cer
epor
t

Sect
ion238–Compl
i
ancewi
thsect
ion207

Wheni
nanywar rant
-caseinst
it
utedonapol
icerepor
t,t
heaccusedappear
sorisbroughtbef
ore
aMagi
str
ateatthecommencementoft hetr
ial
;theMagist
rat
eshall
sati
sfyhi
mselfthathehas
compl
i
edwiththeprovisi
onsofsecti
on207oftheact.

Acaseinsti
tuteduponapoli
cerepor
tmeansacaseini
ti
atedonacharge-sheetsubmi
tt
edby
t
hepoliceoffi
cerinacogni
zabl
ecase.Anyot
hercasei
nit
iat
edinanyothermannerisacase
i
nit
iat
edotherwise-t
hanonapoli
cerepor
t.

Beforeproceedingwit
hthecase,t
heMagistrat
ehastoascer
tai
nastowhetherthecopiesof
document srequir
etobesuppli
edtotheaccusedaccordi
ngt
oSect
ion207havebeencompl i
ed
with.I
ftheyhavenotbeensocompl i
ed,t
heMagi st
rat
eshoul
dgett
hem suppli
edandt hen
proceedwiththecase.

I
fawar
rantcasei
str
iedasasummonscase,
thet
ri
alv
iti
ates.

Sect
ion239–Whenaccusedshal
lbedi
schar
ged

If,
uponconsideri
ngthepoli
cereportandthedocument ssentwi t
hitundersection173and
makingsuchexami nat
ionoftheaccusedast heMagistr
atethinksnecessaryandaf t
ergiv
ing
theprosecuti
onandtheaccusedanoppor tuni
tyofbeingheard,theMagistrat
econsidersthe
chargeagainstt
heaccusedtobegr oundl
ess,heshalldi
scharget heaccused,andrecor
dhi s
reasonsforsodoing.

3
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

UnderSect i
on239,Magi st
rat
ehast hepowert odischarget heaccusedifupont he
considerati
onofthedocument ssenttohim underSect i
on173andt heexami nati
onoft he
accused, i
fany,hethi
nksnecessaryandaf t
ergivi
nganoppor tunit
ytotheprosecut ionandt he
accusedbei nghear
d,heconsidersthatthechargeagai nsttheaccusedisgr oundless.Ifont he
considerati
onofthedocument sandaftertheexami nati
onoft heaccusedandaf terhearingthe
prosecutionandthedefence,t
heMagi str
ateisofopi ni
ont hatther
eisagr oundf orpresumi ng
thattheaccusedhascommi t
tedanof f
encet r
iabl
eundert hischapterwithsuchMagi strateis
compet enttotr
yandwhi chhecanadequat elypunish,heshal l
frameinwr i
ti
ngachar ge.

Theexaminati
onoftheaccusedundersect
ions239and240i smeantonlytogetexpl
anati
on
fr
om theaccusedofthei
ncri
minati
ngcir
cumstancesappeari
nginthedocumentssentupunder
Secti
on173.Iti
sdiscr
eti
onarywi
ththeMagistr
atetoexaminetheaccused.I
tisnotobl
igat
ory
toexamineanaccused.

TheMagistr
atehastorecordreasonsfordischargi
ngtheaccused.Fai
l
uretorecordther
easons
makestheorderi
ll
egal
.Ther ecordi
ngofreasonsf ordi
schar
geisessenti
alsothattheHi
gher
Courtsmaybeabletoknowast obeofopinionthatthechar
geshouldnotbeframedandt he
accusedshoul
dbedischarged.

Sect
ion240–Fr
ami
ngofchar
ge

I
f,uponsuchconsi
derati
onexami nat
ionandheari
ng,theMagistr
atei
sofopini
onthatt
her
eis
groundforpr
esumingthattheaccusedhascommi tt
edanof f
encetri
abl
eunderthi
sChapt
er,
whichsuchMagist
rateiscompetenttotryandwhich,i
nhisopini
oncoul
dbeadequatel
y
punishedbyhi
m,heshallfr
amei nwriti
ngachargeagainstt
heaccused.

Then,
thechar
geshal
lbereadandexpl
ainedtotheaccused,
andheshal
lbeaskedwhet
herhe
pl
eadsgui
lt
yoftheof
fencechar
gedorclaimstobetri
ed.

AMagi str
ateshallfr
ameachargeiftherei
sagr oundforpresumingt
hatt
heaccusedhas
commi tt
edanof fence,
theof
fenceistri
abl
eundert hi
schapter,
theMagi
str
atei
scompetentt
o
tr
yitandt heaccusedcanbeadequatelypuni
shedbyhi m.

AMagistrat
ecanframeachar geinacasewher ei
sgroundf orpr
esumingthattheaccusedhas
committedanoff
encetri
ableunderthisChapter,t
hatistosay,Theoff
encemustbepuni shabl
e
toi
mpr i
sonmentforaperi
odexceedingt woyears.Ift
heoffencewhichappearstobet ri
ableas
asummoncase, nochargeshouldbef ramed,thoughtheaccusedmaybet ri
edwi thoutfr
aming
anychargeasasummonscase, si
milarl
yift
hecasei str
iabl
easaSessi onstr
ial,
nochar gecan
befr
amedbyt heMagistr
ate.

4
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

AMagi
str
atecanfr
ameachargeunderSecti
on240onlywhenheiscompetentt
otrythecase.
AMagi
str
atemaynotbecompetentt
otrythecasei
ftheof
fencehasbeencommi t
tedbeyond
t
hel
ocalj
uri
sdi
cti
onofhi
sCourt
.

Thechargeframedshallber eadov erandexplai

nedtotheaccusedandheshoul dbeasked
whetherhepleadsguil
tyornot .Chargeshal
l bereadovert
heaccusedandnott hepleader
.It
hasbeenheldthatthechargemaybeexpl ainedtothecounseloft
heaccusedandhemaybe
al
lowedtopleadornott opleadonbehal foftheaccused.Butt
hisvi
ewi snotcorrect
.The
char
gehast obeexplainedtot heaccusedandt heaccusedhastopleadguil
tyornot.

Sect
ion241–Conv
ict
iononpl
eaofgui
l
ty

Ift
heaccusedpleadsgui
l
ty,
theMagi
str
ateshal
lrecor
dthepl
eaandmay
,onhi
sdi
scr
eti
on,
convi
cthi
mt her
eon.

I
ftheaccusedpl
eadsgui
l
ty,
theMagi
str
ateshoul
drecor
dhi
spl
eai
nhi
sownwor
dsandcl
ear
ly.

TheMagi str
atehasdi scret
iontoconvictanaccusedonhispleaofgui
lty
.Butthepl
eaofguil
ty
mustbecl ear.Iti
sadmi ssi
onofal l
thefactsonwhichthechargeisf
oundedandalsothe
admissi
onofgui l
tinrespectofthem.Whent heaccusedpleadednotguil
tyatthet
imeof
chargebeingr eadovertohim andtheMagi st
rat
eproceededtotakeevi
dencebutafter
wards
theaccusedaccept edtheguilt
,itwasheldthathecoul
dnotbeconv i
ctedunderSecti
on241.

Thepleaoftheaccusedmustberecor
dedasmuchaspossi
bleint
hever
ywordsofthe
accusedsothatt
hehighercour
tsmaydeter
minewhet
hert
hepleaoft
heaccusedr
eall
y
amountedtoaconfessionoft
heguil
t.

Sect
ion242–Ev
idencef
orpr
osecut
ion

I
ftheaccusedrefusestopl
eadordoesnotplead,
orclai
mstobetri
edort
heMagi
str
atedoes
notconvi
cttheaccusedundersect
ion241t
heMagi st
rat
eshal
lfi
xadatef
ort
heexaminat
ionof
wit
nesses.

Provi
dedthattheMagi
strateshal
lsuppl
yinadv
ancet
otheaccused,
thest
atementofwi
tnesses
recor
dedduringinv
est
igati
onbythepoli
ce.

TheMagist
rat
emay,ont
heappli
cat
ionoft
heprosecut
ion,i
ssueasummonst
oanywi
tnesses
di
rect
inghi
mtoat
tendortopr
oduceanydocumentorotherthi
ng,

Ont
hedatesofi
xed,t
heMagistr
ateshal
lpr
oceedt
otakeal
lsuchev
idenceasmaybepr
oduced
i
nsuppor
toft
heprosecut
ion:

5
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Provi
dedthattheMagist
rat
emayper mi
tthecr
oss-
examinat
ionofanywi
tnesst
obedefer
red
unti
lanyotherwit
nessorwit
nesseshav
ebeenexaminedorrecal
lanywi
tnessf
orf
urt
hercross-
examinat
ion

Whent heaccuseddoesnotpleadguil
tyorclai
mst obet r
iedorevenonpleaofgui l
tythe
Magistrat
edoesnotconv i
cthi
m, heshall
fixadatefortheexaminati
onofwitnesses.Iti
sfor
thebenefi
toftheaccusedthatthi
sprovi
sionforfi
xingadatehasbeenpr ov
ided.Ifthe
Magistrat
eaft
erthestatementofaccusednotpleadingguil
ty,
str
aightwayproceedswi t
hthe
case,t
heaccusedmaybepr ej
udicedandsuchproceedingcertai
nlymakesthetri
alill
egal
.

Ont hedatesof i
xed,theMagist
rateisboundt otakeal
ltheevidencebyt heprosecuti
on.The
provisi
onofSect i
on242(3)i
smandat ory
.Therecanbenodoubtt hattheMagistrat
eisboundto
takeallsuchevidenceasmaybepr oducedinsupportoftheprosecuti
on.AMagi strat
eisnot
compet entt
oacqui tt
heaccusedwi thouttaki
ngallt
heev i
dencewhi chisoffer
edbyt he
prosecuti
on.Ifhedoesacquitwithouttakingal
ltheevi
dence,theorderisil
legal
.

Undersect
ion242( 3)whichisinverywideterm,theMagistr
ateisboundt otakeallsuch
evi
denceasmaybepr oducedinsupportoftheprosecut
ion.Thereisampl eaut
horityi
nsuppor t
ofthevi
ewt hati
fint hecourseofthetri
al,
theprosecuti
onthinksitnecessaryt
of i
leaddit
ional
documentsorstatement sofwitnessesonwhi chtheypr
oposest orely
,thenon-supplyofcopies
doesnotpreventt
hem f rom fi
l
ingthedocument sorexaminingthewitnesses.

Iti
snott heboundendut yofthecourttocompel theat tendanceoft hewitnessessuomot oand
examinet hem underSecti
on311, eveniftheprosecutiondoesnotcar etoproducethem.The
courtmayhel ptheprosecuti
oninsecur i
ngtheat tendanceoft hewitnesses.Theprosecuti
on
hastogi vetheli
stofthewitnessesandpr ayforissueofsummonsandt hesummonsbei ng
i
nfructuous,theprosecut
ionhast oapproachtheCour tforwarrantetc.I
ftheprosecuti
onfail
s
totakestepsanddoesnotpr oduceevidence,thecour tmaycl osetheprosecutionevi
denceand
proceedf ur
therandmayacqui ttheaccused.

Thet er
m examinationmeanst heexami nati
on, cross-examinationandre-
exami nati
on.
Consequently
,whenawi tnessisexami nedbyt hepr osecuti
onont hedatefixedfortaki
ng
evidence,
thewitnesshast obecr oss-exami nedbyt heaccused.Buti nsuit
abl ecasesthe
Magi st
rat
emaypost ponethecross-exami nationofawi tnesswhohasbeenexami nedbythe
prosecuti
ontil
lotherwitnessorwi t
nesseshav ebeenexami ned.Thi
sprovi
sioni sfort
hebenefi
t
oftheaccusedt ogivehim opport
unityt ocross- exami neallthewit
nessesincont i
nuati
on.

Sect
ion243–Ev
idencef
ordef
ence

Theaccusedshal
lthenbecal
ledupontoent
eruponhisdefenceandproducehi
sevi
dence;
and
i
ftheaccusedput
si nanywri
tt
enstat
ement,
theMagistr
ateshall
fil
eitwi
thther
ecor
d.

6
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Iftheaccused, aft
erhehadent ereduponhisdefence,appli
est otheMagistrat
etoissueany
processf orcompel l
i
ngt heatt
endanceofanywi t
nessf orthepur poseofexaminat
ionorcross-
exami nation,
orthepr oduct
ionofanydocumentorot herthing,theMagistr
ateshal
l i
ssuesuch
processunl essheconsi der
sthatsuchappli
cati
onshoul dber efusedonthegroundthatiti
s
madef orthepurposeofv exat
ionordelayorfordefeat
ingt heendsofjusti
ceandsuchgr ound
shallber ecordedbyhi minwrit
ing:

Providedt hat
,whentheaccusedhascross-
examinedorhadt heoppor
tunit
yofcross-
examini
ng
anywi tnessbefor
eenteri
ngonhisdefence,
theattendanceofsuchwitnessshal
lnotbe
compel ledunderthi
ssecti
on,unl
esst
heMagi st
rateissati
sfi
edthati
tisnecessar
yfortheends
ofjusti
ce.

TheMagi st
ratemay,bef
oresummoninganywi
tnessonanappl
icati
onunderSub-Sect
ion(2)
,
requi
rethatther
easonabl
eexpensesi
ncurr
edbythewit
nessi
nattendi
ngforthepurposesof
thetr
ial
bedepositedinCourt
.

B.
-Casesi
nst
it
utedot
her
wiset
hanonpol
i
cer
epor
t

Sect
ion244–Ev
idencef
orpr
osecut
ion

When, i
nanywarrant-
caseinsti
tut
edotherwisethanonapol icereportt
heaccusedappearsoris
broughtbefor
eaMagi st
rat
e,theMagistrat
eshal l
proceedtoheart heprosecuti
onandtakeall
suchevidenceasmaybepr oducedinsuppor toftheprosecuti
on.TheMagi str
atemay,
ont he
appli
cati
onoftheprosecut
ion,i
ssueasummonst oanyofi t
swi t
nessesdirect
inghi
mtoat t
end
ortoproduceanydocumentorot hert
hing.

Sect
ion245–Whenaccusedshal
lbedi
schar
ged

I
f,upont akingal
ltheevi
dencereferr
edtoinsecti
on244theMagi
str
ateconsider
s,forreasons
t
ober ecorded,t
hatnocaseagainsttheaccusedhasbeenmadeoutwhich,
ifunrebutt
ed,would
warranthisconvicti
on,
theMagistrat
eshalldi
schargehi
m.

7
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Nothi
ngint
hissecti
onshal
lbedeemedt oprev
entaMagist
rat
efrom di
schar
gingtheaccused
atanypr
evi
ousstageofthecaseif
,forr
easonstober
ecordedbysuchMagistrat
e,he
consi
der
sthechargetobegroundl
ess.

Sect
ion246–Pr
ocedur
ewher
eaccusedi
snotdi
schar
ged.

I
f,whensuchevidencehasbeentaken,oratanyprevi
ousstageofthecase,theMagi st
ratei
sof
opi
nionthatt
her
ei sgroundf
orpresumingthattheaccusedhascommi tt
edanof fencetri
abl
e
undert
hisChapter,whi
chsuchMagistr
ateiscompetenttotryandwhich,i
nhisopi ni
on,coul
d
beadequatel
ypunishedbyhim,
heshall f
rameinwr i
ti
ngachargeagainsttheaccused.

Thechar
geshallthenber
eadandexpl
ainedt
otheaccused,
andheshal
lbeaskedwhet
herhe
pl
eadsguil
tyorhasanydef
encet
omake.

Ift
heaccusedpleadsgui
l
ty,
theMagi
str
ateshal
lrecor
dthepl
ea,
andmay
,inhi
sdi
scr
eti
on,
convi
cthi
mt her
eon.

Iftheaccusedrefusestoplead,ordoesnotpl eadorclai
mst obet r
iedorift
heaccusedi snot
conv i
ctedunderSub-Secti
on(3)heshal lber equi
redtostale,
atthecommencementoft henext
hear i
ngofthecaseor ,
iftheMagistr
atef orreasonst oberecordedinwrit
ingsot hi
nksfit,
forthwit
hwhetherhewi shestocross-exami neany ,
andifso,which,ofthewitnessesforthe
prosecutionwhoseev i
dencehasbeent aken.

Ifhesayshedoessowish,thewi
tnessesnamedbyhim shal
lber
ecal
l
edand,
aft
ercr
oss-
examinat
ionandre-
examinati
on(
ifany),
theyshal
lbedi
schar
ged.

Theev
idenceofanyremai
ningwit
nessesfortheprosecut
ionshall
nextbet
akenandaf
tercr
oss
-
examinat
ionandre-
exami
nation(
ifany)
,theyshal
lalsobedischar
ged.

Sect
ion247–Ev
idencef
ordef
ence.

8
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Theaccusedshal
lthenbecal
l
edupontoenteruponhi
sdef
enceandpr
oducehi
sev
idence;
and
thepr
ovisi
onsofsecti
on243shal
lappl
ytot
hecase.

C.
-Concl
usi
onoft
ri
al

Sect
ion248–Acqui
tt
alorconv
ict
ion

If
,inanycaseundert
hisChapterinwhi
chachar gehasbeenf
ramed,
theMagi
str
atef
indst
he
accusednotgui
lt
y,heshal
lrecordanorderofacqui
tt
al.

Wher e,
inanycaseundert
hisChapter,theMagistr
atef i
ndstheaccusedguil
ty,
hutdoesnot
proceedinaccor
dancewit
ht hepr
ov i
sionsofsection325orsection360,heshall
,af
terhear
ing
theaccusedonthequesti
onofsentence, passsentenceuponhim accor
dingtolaw.

Wher e,
inanycaseundert hisChapter
,aprevi
ousconvi
cti
onischargedunderthepr ovi
sionsof
Sub-Secti
on(7)ofsection211andt heaccuseddoesnotadmitthathehasbeenpr evi
ousl y
convict
edasallegedint hechar
ge,theMagistr
atemay,af
terhehasconvictedt
hesai daccused,
takeevidencei
nr espectoftheal
legedprevi
ousconvi
cti
on,andshallr
ecordafindi
ngt hereon:

Provi
dedthatnosuchchar geshal
lbereadoutbyt heMagist
rat
enorshallt
heaccusedbeasked
topl
eadtheretonorshall
theprevi
ousconv i
cti
onber ef
err
edtobytheprosecut
ionorinany
evi
denceadducedbyi t
,unlessandunt
iltheaccusedhasbeenconvict
edunderSub-Sect
ion(2)
.

Sect
ion249–Absenceofcompl
ainant

Whent heproceedingshav ebeeni nst

ituteduponcompl ai
nt,
andonanydayf ixedfort
hehear
ing
ofthecase, thecompl ai
nanti sabsent,andtheoffencemaybel awf ul
l
ycompoundedori snota
cognizableoffence,theMagi strat
emay ,
inhisdi
screti
on,notwithstandinganythi
ngherei
nbef
ore
contained,atanytimebef oret hechargehasbeenf ramed,discharget heaccused.

9
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Sect
ion250–Compensat
ionf
oraccusat
ionwi
thoutr
easonabl
ecause.

If,
inanycasei nst
it
uteduponcompl ai
ntoruponi nfor
mat i
ongiventoapol i
ceoffi
cerort oa
Magi st
rate,oneormorepersonsi sorareaccusedbef oreaMagi str
at eofanyoffencet ri
ableby
aMagi strat
e,andtheMagistratebywhom t hecasei shearddi
schargesoracqui tsall oranyof
theaccused, andi
sofopiniont hatt
herewasnor easonablegr
oundf ormakingtheaccusat i
on
againstthem oranyofthem, theMagistr
atemay ,
byhisorderofdischar georacquittal,i
fthe
personuponwhosecompl aintorinfor
mationt heaccusati
onwasmadei spresent,callupon
himf or
thwithtoshowcausewhyheshoul dnotpaycompensat iontosuchaccusedort oeach
oranyofsuchaccusedwhent herearemoret hanoneor ,i
fsuchper soni snotpr
esentdi rectthe
i
ssueofasummonst ohimt oappearandshowcauseasaf or
esaid.

TheMagistrateshal
lrecordandconsideranycausewhichsuchcompl ai
nantorinf
ormantmay
show,andifheissatisfi
edthatt
herewasnor easonabl
egroundf ormaki
ngt heaccusat
ion,
may,
forr
easonst oberecorded,makeanor dert
hatcompensati
ont osuchamountnotexceeding
theamountoff i
nehei sempoweredtoi mpose,ashemaydet ermine,
bepaidbysuch
complai
nantorinformanttotheaccusedortoeachoranyoft hem.

TheMagistr
atemay ,
byt heor
derdir
ect
ingpaymentoft hecompensati
onunderSub-
Sect
ion(2)
fur
theror
derthat
,indefaul
tofpayment
, t
hepersonorderedtopaysuchcompensati
onshal
l
undergosimplei
mpr i
sonmentforaperi
odnotexceedingthir
tyday
s.

Whenanyper
sonisi
mpri
sonedunderSub-
Secti
on(3)
,thepr
ovi
sionsofsect
ions68and69of
t
heIndi
anPenal
Code(45of1860)shal
l
,sofarasmaybe,appl
y.

Nopersonwhohasbeendir
ect
edtopaycompensati
onundert
hissecti
onshall
,byreasonof
suchorder
,beexempt
edfr
om anyci
vi
lorcr
imi
nalli
abil
i
tyi
nrespectofthecomplai
ntmadeor
i
nformati
ongiv
enbyhim:

Provi
dedthatanyamountpai
dtoanaccusedpersonundert
hissecti
onshal
lbetakeni
nto
accounti
nawar di
ngcompensat
iont
osuchpersoninanysubsequentci
vi
lsui
trel
ati
ngtothe
samemat ter
.

10
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Acompl ai
nantori
nf or
mantwhohasbeenor der
edunderSub-
Section(2)byaMagi
str
ateofthe
secondclasstopaycompensationexceedi
ngonehundr
edrupees,mayappealf
rom t
heorder
asifsuchcomplainantori
nfor
manthadbeenconvict
edonat r
ialhel
dbysuchMagist
rate.

Whenanor derforpaymentofcompensationtoanaccusedpersonismadeinacasewhi chis

subjecttoappealunderSub-Secti
on(6)
,thecompensati
onshallnotbepaidtohim beforethe
peri
odal l
owedf orthepresent
ati
onoftheappealhasel
apsed,or,i
fanappealispresented,
beforetheappeal hasbeendecided;
andwheresuchorderismadei nacasewhichi snotso
subjecttoappealthecompensat i
onshal
lnotbepaidbefor
etheexpirat
ionofonemont hfr
om
thedateoft heorder.

Thepr
ovi
sionsoft
hissect
ionappl
ytosummons-
casesaswel
last
owar
rantcases.

QUESTI
ON3:
-Di
scusst
hepr
ovi
sionsoft
enderofpar
don?

SECTI
ON306-
Tenderofpar
dont
oaccompl
i
ce

Thepurposeoft
hissecti
onistogr
antpardontoanaccusedwher
easeri
ousoffencei
sall
eged
tohav
ebeencommi ttedbymanypersonssothatwi
ththehel
poftheev
idenceofsuchaccused,
theof
fendersmaybepunished.

Thepar doncanbegr antedwhent heof f

encesar etri
ablebytheCourtofSessionorbyacour t
ofspecialJudgeappoi ntedundertheCr iminalLaw( Amendment )Act1952andt heoffences
punishablewithimprisonmentwhi chmayext endto7y earsorwithamor eseveresentencenor
excl
usivelytr
iablebyaCour tofSession.Thepr ovi
sionofthi
ssectioncannotbeenlarged.
Pardoncanonl ybetenderedwi t
hrespectt othecategoriesofoff
encesment i
onedint he
secti
onandt ononeot hers.Thejuri
sdicti
ontot enderpardonisstr
ict
lyl
imit
edt otheoffences
ment i
onedint hesection.

TheChi efJudi
cial
Magist
rateoraMet ropoli
tanMagi st
rat
eortheMagi str
ateoffir
stcl
assmay
grantpardonwiththeonl
ydiff
erencethattheChiefJudici
alMagistr
ateoraMet r
opol
itan
Magistratemaygrantpar
doni nanycasewhet hertheyhavetakencognizanceofitornot.They
maygr antpardonatanystageofinvesti
gati
onorinquiryi
ntoortri
aloftheoffenceevenifthe

11
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

tr
ialisproceedingbefor
etheCourtofSessi
on.ButtheMagistr
ateoff i
rstcl
asscangrant
pardononl yinthecaseswhichheisenqui
ri
ngortryi
ngandhecangr antpardononl
yatany
stageoft heinquir
yortr
ial
.AMagistr
ateofFir
stClasscannotgrantpardonatthest
ageofthe
i
nv esti
gation,norcandosoinacasewhichisnotbeforehimforinquir
yortrial
.

Theonlyconditi
onsrequir
edforgranti
ngpar donaret hatt
heaccusedshouldmakeat horough
andcompletediscl
osureofallt
hef actswit
hinhisknowl edget
hrowingli
ghtupontheoffenceor
theof
fencesaboutwhi chhepromisest ogiv
eev idence.TheMagistr
ategrant
ingpar
donhas
powertoaddanycondi ti
on.TheMagi str
atemaymakeacondi ti
onthatiftheappr
overfail
sto
makeaf ul
ldiscl
osureofthefact
s, hemaybepr osecuted.

Itisdiscreti
onarywi
ththeMagistr
atetograntpardon.Butheshouldexerci
set hepowerin
except i
onalcir
cumstances.I
fnoapproverisexaminedasawi tnesstheotheraccusedwillgo
free,pardonmaybegr anted.Whenthereareanumberofwi tnesses,off
act,thepardonshould
notbegr ant
edtoanaccused.Inanycasenopar donshouldbegr ant
edtot hemainof f
ender.

I
toft
enhappensthatthepol
i
cedoesnotchar
gesheetoneoftheaccusedandexami
neshi
m as
awit
ness.Theev
idenceofsuchawit
nessisnoti
rr
elev
ant,
butsuchcourseshoul
dbe
depr
ecat
ed.

TheMagi str
ategranti
ngpar donshallexplai
nal lt
hecondit
ionstotheaccused.Hehast omake
i
tcleartotheaccusedt hatifhedoesnotf ulfi
llt
heconditi
onsandifheconceal sanymateri
al
factorifhetel
lsanythi
ngf alse,
hemaybet r
ied.TheMagistr
ateshall
recor dhisr
easonsand
shouldalsoment i
onast owhet hert
hepar donwasaccept ed.TheMagi strat
ehasalsotosuppl
y
acopyoft hi
spr ocedur
et otheaccusedi faskedf or
.Ift
hemannerofpar donissubst
anti
all
y
compliedwith,t
houghitisnotv eryr
egular l
yrecorded,t
heprocedurei
sl egal.

Beforeanaccusedcanbeexami nedagainstaco-accusednotonlythatapar
donshoul
dbe
tenderedtohim,butiti
snecessarythatheshouldacceptit
.Ifthepardoni
snotaccept
edbya
person,hisposi
ti
onremainsthatofanaccused.Theaccept anceofpardonneednotbein
writ
ing.Itmaybeev i
dencedbytheconduct .Apersoncanbesai dtohaveaccept
edapardon
onlywhenhest i
ckstotheconditionsi
mposed.

TheMagi
str
atet
ender
ingpar
donhast
orecor
dther
easonf
orgr
ant
ingpar
don.Ther
easonst
hat

12
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

theaccusedi sgrantedpardonsot hatev i

dencemaybeav ai
labl
eagainsttheotheraccusedisa
goodr eason.Thegi vi
ngofthereasoni snotacondi t
ionprecedentf
orgrantingapardon.Iti
s
onlyamat terofprocedureandthef ail
uretor ecor
dreasonisonlyanirr
egulari
tywhichdoesnot
affectthepardon.Ithasbeenheldt hatrecordingofreasonismandatoryprovi
sion.I
fthe
reasonsarenotr ecordedtheorderofMagi stratecanbequashed.

Theex pression‘anypersonsupposedt ohavebeendir

ectlyori
ndi
rect
lyconcer
nedinorpr i
vyto
anoff ence’ doesnotnecessar i
lymeanaper sonagai
nstwhom achargesheethasbeen
submi ttednori sitnecessarythatheshouldknowexactl
ywhatcri
mehasbeencommi tted.The
groundofgr antingapar donisnottheextentofcompl
ici
tyofaper
soni ntheof
fence.Thefact
thattheper sonconcer neddoesnoti mpli
catehimsel
ftothesameextentashedoesot hersis
nobari ngrantingapar don.

Thepar dongrantedi snotl i

mit
edtotheoff
encesforwhi chthetrial
isbei ngheld,r
atheri
t
extendstoalltheof fenceswhichweresoconnectedwi t
ht heoffencef orwhichthepardonwas
tendered.Theappr ov eronaccept
anceofthepardonisrequiredtomakeacompl etediscl
osure
ofallthefact
swi thinhi sknowl
edgebeari
ngupont heoffenceorof fencesast owhichhegav e
evidence.Par
donpr ot ect
stheoff
enderf
rom bei
ngpr osecutedfortheof fenceforwhichpardon
i
sgr anted.

I
nsomecasespar
dononcegr
ant
edandaccept
edcannotbewi
thdr
awn.

Ift
hepersontowhom par donist
enderedhasnotbeenreleasedonbailpri
ortogranti
nghim
pardon,
heshal lbedet
ainedincustodyunti
lthet
erminati
onofthetri
al.Theprovi
siontokeep
himincustodyismandat oryandneit
hertheMagist
ratenortheJudgenorev ent
heHi ghCourt
cangranthim bail
.

Cust
ody,undert
hissect
ion,
meansajudi
cial
cust
ody.Aper sonwhoi
sgr
ant
edpar
donhasnot
tobesenttopol
icecust
ody.Hehast
obekeptinjudi
cial
lock-up.

Eveni
fthepardonhasbeenref
usedatonestage,
afurt
herrequestcanbeent
ert
ainedand
consi
deredonl
yiff
reshoraddi
ti
onal
factsar
eplacedbytheparti
esconcer
ned.

13
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Atenderofpardonanditsaccept
anceisamatterenti
rel
ybetweencourtconcernedandt he
per
sontowhom i ti
smade.Theot herper
sonagainstwhom aninvest
igat
ionorenquiryisgoing
oninconnect
ionwiththesameof f
encehavenorighttoobj
ecttothemaki ngt
het enderof
par
don.

UndertheoldCode,itwashel
dbyt heDelhiHighCour tthatt
heordertenderi
ngthepardonwas
anadmi ni
str
ati
veorderandsoitwasnotr ev
isable.Thiscasewasov errul
edandt heorderwas
rev
isabl
e.Underthepresentl
aw,Theordertenderingthepardonandor derdecl
i
ningtot ender
pardonareint
erl
ocutoryor
dersandsonor evisi
onl i
es.

Therearet woway sopent otheprosecuti

ontoexami neaco- accusedagainsttheot hers
withoutgrant
inghim pardon.Thepublicprosecutormaywi thdrawfrom theprosecut i
onagainst
thataccusedunderSect i
on321, gethi
m dischargedandt henexami nehim.Thesecondcour se
opent otheprosecuti
oni stoseparat
ethecaseoft hatparticul
araccusedf r
om t hatoftheother
accusedandt henexami nehimint hecaseagainsttheotheraccused.Thepol i
cecarrying
i
nv est
igati
onmaymakeanaccusedawi tnessbygivinghim assurancethathewoul dnotbe
prosecuted.ApersonliabletobesummonedunderSect ion319i sacompet entwitnessifnot
summonedasanaccusedundert hatSecti
on55.

Therel
easeoft
heappr
overonbai
lbyt
heHi
ghCour
tdoesnei
theraf
fectpar
dongr
ant
edt
ohi
m
nort
hetri
al.

SECTI
ON307-
Powert
odi
rectt
enderofpar
don

Atanytimeaft
ercommitmentofacase,butbeforejudgmentispassed,theCour
ttowhicht
he
commi t
mentismademay ,wi
thav i
ewtoobt ai
ningatthetri
alt
heevidenceofanyper
son
supposedtohavebeendi
rect
lyori
ndir
ectlyconcernedin,
orpri
vyto,anysuchoff
ence,t
endera
pardononthesamecondit
iontosuchperson.

SECTI
ON308-
Tri
alofper
sonnotcompl
yi
ngwi
thcondi
ti
onsofpar
don

Theprosecuti
onofanapprovercanbest
art
edonl
yonthecert
if
icat
eofthepubli
cprosecut
ort
o
theef
fectthattheper
sonhasnotcompli
edwit
hthecondi
ti
onsofthepardonbywil
l
full
y

14
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

conceali
nganyt
hingessent
ialf
actorbygiv
ingfalseev
idence.Thesol
ebasi
sfort
he
prosecut
ionoft
heapproveristhecer
ti
fi
cateofthepubli
cprosecut
or.

Thepr ovisi
onofthissectionpre-supposesthatthepardonwhichhadbeentenderedwas
acceptedandt hereaft
ertheappr overhaswill
full
yconceal
edanythi
ngessenti
alorhasgiven
falseevidence.Theremustbeaccept anceofthepardonandthepersonmustbeexami ned.I
f
thepardonhasnotbeenaccept ed,thetr
ial
oft heappr
overwi
thoutcert
if
icat
eisil
legal
anditis
alsoil
legaltotryhim wit
hot heraccused.

Theapprovermaybet r
iedfort
heoffencei
nrespectofwhichpar
donhasbeent
ender
ed,ort
he
otherof
fencewhichmighthavebeencommi t
tedinconnecti
onwit
hthesamematt
erandfor
gi
v i
ngfal
seevidence.

Thetri
alofapersonwhohasnotcompl i
edwitht
hecondit
ionoft
heprovisi
onmustnotbehel
d
j
ointl
ywithotheraccusedoft
hecase,
butift
hepardonhasnotbeenacceptedbyhi
m,hemay
bejoi
ntl
ytri
ed.

Thetrial
forperjurycannotbestartedwithoutthesanct i
onoftheHighCour t.TheHighCour
tis
notboundtoaccor dthesancti
onineachandev er
ycase.TheHighCour tbeforegrant
ing
sancti
onshouldconsi deral
lthecircumstancesi nthecaseanddeci dethemai nquest
ion
whethertheprev i
ousstatementort heconfessionwast rueandvoluntar
y.I
fi ti
sofopini
ont
hat
theprevi
ousst atementandconf essionwast r
ue, t
hesanctionmaybeaccor ded.Ifthe
stat
ementatt het i
meofpar donisnott r
ue,theinferencemaybet hatthestatementwas
obtai
nedbyf orceandsanct i
onisnott obegr anted.

Forthetr
ialofanappr
overonl
ythesancti
onoftheHighCour
tisneeded.Nei
theranenqui
ry
underSecti
on340noracompl ai
ntbytheCour
tunderSect
ion195isneeded.Theapprov
ershal
l
betri
edont hechar
ge-
sheetsubmit
tedbythepoli
ce.

Atthetr
ialoft
heapprover
,thestat
ementatthetimeofaccept i
ngthepardon,
thestatement
madebyt heapprov
erundersecti
on164af t
eraccepti
ngt hepardonandthest
atementatt he
commi t
talpr
oceedi
ngandatt hetr
ial
shall
berelevantagainstt
heaccusedathistr
ialforper
jur
y.
Thestatementtobeadmissibl
eunderthi
ssecti
onshoul dbemadeaf tert
heacceptanceofthe
par
don.

15
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Theaccusedhasarighttopleadatthet
ri
althathef ul
fi
ll
edtheconditi
onsofthepar
donandi
f
hesopleads,
theburdentopr ov
ethathedidnotcompl ywitht
hepar donei
therbywil
l
ful
conceal
mentofessenti
alfactorgi
vi
ngfalseevidence,l
iesontheprosecut
ion.

ASessi onsJudgeorMagi strat

etryinganappr overhast oaskt heappr overwhet herhepl eads
thathehadcompl i
edwi t
ht hecondi ti
onsoft hepar don.TheJudgehast oputt hi
squestion
beforeheexami nesthewi tnesses;fail
uret ofoll
owt hisprocedur ewoul dviti
atethet r
ial
.Sub-
sect i
ons( 4)and( 5)ofSect ion308makei tclearthati
nt hetrialofanappr ov erwhohas
forfei
tedt hepar don,thequest i
onwhet herhepl eadsthatthecondi tionsofpar donhav ebeen
compl iedwi thbyhi m hast obef i
rstdecidedbef orehei stri
edf ororiginaloffence.Iti
s
i
mper ativ
ef ortheSessionsCour tstoaskt heaccusedwhet herhepl eadst hattheconditi
onsof
pardonhav ebeencompl iedwi thbeforet hechar gefortheor igi
naloffencei sreadout.Ifheso
pleads, aclearfindingont hequest i
onofcompl i
anceornon- complianceoft hecondi t
ionsof
pardonwoul dbecondi t
ionpr ecedenttohi spr ot
ectionfortheor igi
nalof f
enceaf terheforfei
ts
hispar don.

TheCourthaspowert
orecor
dthepl
eaoft
heappr
overandf
ort
hesakeofj
ust
ice,
ithast
o
recor
diti
nfull
.

Thecourtaft
errecor
dingt
hepl
eaoftheapproverwi
ll
proceedwi
tht
hetri
al,
butbef
orepassi
ng
anyjudgment,i
thastodeci
dewhet
herornottheapprov
erhascompl
iedwit
hthecondi
ti
onsof
thepardon.

I
ftheCourtcomestotheconclusi
onthattheprosecut
ioncoul
dnotpr
ovethattheapproverdi
d
notcomplywit
hthecondi
tionsofthepardon,
ithastopassajudgmentofacquit
tal
.Onlywhen
thefi
ndi
ngisagai
nsttheapprover
,hemayconv ictt
heaccused.

Question4.WhatdoyoumeanbyFIR?I
nwhatcir
cumstancesaMagi
str
atecanmakeanor
der
forinv
estigati
onofanof
fence? ORWhatar
ethei
ngr
edientofFI
R?Whataret
heeff
ect
sof
delayinfi
lingFIR?

INTRODCTI ON:-
Fir
stinf
ormat
ionreportandinvesti
gationpl
aysani mpor
tantrol
ein
administ
eringofcri
minalj
ust
ice.I
tisexpect
edt hatitshoul
dber ecor
dedwithutmostcar
eand
cauti
on.Itshoul
dber ecor
dedwithoutanydelaysothatmani pul
ati
onoffactsdoesnotar
ise.

16
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

FI
R&I nvest
igat
iondetermi
nesthatapri
mafaci
ecaseexistagai
nstt
heaccusedornot
.
Sect
ions154ofCr .
P.C.-
1973descri
bedi
ndetai
laboutFI
R,butfi
wordisnotassuchwri
tt
eni
n
ti
ssecti
on.

ESSENTI
ALELEMENTSOFF.
I.
R.

Al
thought
hedef
ini
ti
onofFI
Risnogi
veni
ntheCr
.P.
C.howev
eri
tmaybeasf
oll
ows:
-

i
) Itisi
nfor
mat
ionwhi
chi
sgi
venatt
hef
ir
stst
aget
othePol
i
ceOf
fi
cerI
n-char
geoft
he
Pol
i
cest
ation.

i
i
) I
nfor
mat
ionmustr
elat
etoacogni
zabl
eof
fence.

i
i
i) I
tisont
hebasi
soft
hisi
nfor
mat
iont
hati
nvest
igat
ioni
ntot
heof
fencecommences.

v
) TheFI
Rcouldbei
nanyt
ypei
.e.wr
it
tenoror
al.I
tcanal
sobegi
venont
elephone.Suni
l
v
/sSt
ateofMP,1997.

I
tisessenti
alt
hatadet ai
ledexplanat
ionofthehappeningshouldbegiveninFIR.I
nacaseof
NavratanMahantov
/ sStateofBihar-
1980,t
hecour tobservedthatt
heprosecuti
oncannotbe
di
smi ssedmerel
yont hebasisthatFI
Rdoesnotcont ainsthecompleteexpl
anati
onof
happeningasonl
ygistoft hehappeni
nginfactual
positionneedstobement i
oned.

Secti
on154say s-AssoonastheOffi
cer-
in-
char
ger
eceivesi
nfor
mat
ionofcommissi
onofa
cogni
zableoffenceentr
ytothi
sef
fectshall
&immediat
elybemadei
ntheRegist
ermaint
ained
fort
hispurposewithoutdel
ay.

Ifanyinf
ormati
onisgi
venoral
l
y ,
itshouldber
ecor
dedandt
hent
oreadandobt
ainedt
he
signat
ureoftheper
songiv
inginf
ormation.

17
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

I
nacaseofSt
ateofA.Pv/sP.Ramul
u,1993,
thecour
tobser
vedt
hatFI
Rcannotberef
usedt
o
ber
ecor
dedonthegroundthatt
heof
fencewascommitt
ednotwi
thi
nthej
uri
sdi
cti
on.

Thereshoul
dbenodel
ayi
nregi
ster
ingFI
R(GnashBhawanPat
edv
/sSt
ateofMahar
asht
ra,
1979.)
.

CIRCUMSTANCESWHENMAGI STRATEORDERSFOR I NVESTIGATION:–Invest

igat
ionbegins
withtheFIR.IftheFIRisregardinganynon-cogni
zableof
fencethensuchi
nformati
onshallbe
recordedintheregi
stermaintainedforthi
spurposeandthepersonwhoisgivi
ngthe
i
nf or
mat i
onwillberefer
redtotheMagi str
ate.I
notherwordsinv
esti
gati
oncannotbedone
withouttheorderoftheMagistrate.

Sect
ion155oft
heCodeofcr
imi
nal
procedur
epr
ovi
dest
hat
:-

1. NoPoliceOff
icershal
li
nvesti
gat
eaNon- cogni
zabl
ecasewi
thouttheor
deroft
he
Magist
rat
ehavingpowertotrysuchcaseorcommi tt
hecasef
ortri
al.

2. AnyPoli
ceof f
icerrecei
vi
ngsuchor dermayexer
cisethesamepowersinrespectoft
he
i
nvest
igat
ion(exceptthepowert oar
restwit
houtwarr
ant)asanOff
icer
–in-
chargeofapolice
st
ati
onmayexer ciseincognizabl
ecase.

3. Whereacaserel
atest
otwoormor eoffencesofwhichatleastoneiscogni
zabl
e,t
hesame
shal
lbedeemedtobeacognizabl
ecase,notwit
hstandi
ngthattheotherof
fencesar
enon-
cogni
zabl
e.

4. Aninvesti
gati
oni
nanon- cogni
zableoffencemadeundert
heorderofMagi
str
ateist
reat
ed
asininv
esti
gati
onunderchapter-
XIIandtherepor
twil
lbesubmit
tedtotheMagi
str
ateunder
sect
ion173(2).

I
ncasesofcogni
zabl
eOf
fences,
ther
eisnoneedoft
heor
der
soft
heMagi
str
atet
obegi
nthe

18
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

i
nvesti
gation.Howeverithasalsobeenmadecl earbytheSupremeCour tanewpr ovi
sion
underthecodeundersection155(4)whi chincorporatesaviewofSupr emeCour tt
hatwherea
caserelat
estotwoormor eof f
encesofwhi chatleastoneiscognizablethecaseshallbe
deemedt obeacognizablecase, i
n-spi
teoft hefactthatot
heroff
encesar enon-cogni
zable,
wheretherearebothcognizabl
eandnon- cognizabl
eof f
encesmixedt ogethert
hePoli
ceOf fi
cer
caninvesti
gateev
enifthereissinglecognizableoffence.

ht
tps:
//www.
lawor
do.
com/

ht
tps:
//www.
lawor
do.
com/

5.Di
scusst
hepr
ovi
sionsr
elat
ingt
oInf
ormat
iont
othepol
i
ceandt
hei
rpower
stoi
nvest
igat
e.

INTRODUCTI ON:–Sect i
on154speaksofi nformati
onr el
atingtothecommi ssi
onofa
cogni
zableoffencegiventoanoffi
cer-
in-
char geofaPol i
ceSt at
ion.Thissecti
onhasat hree-
fol
dobjectthattoinf
ormt heDist
ri
ctMagistrateandSupdt t.OfPolicewhoar eresponsi
blefor
maintai
ningpeaceandsaf et
yoftheDistri
ct.Iti
salsoper t
inenttobr oughti
tinthenoti
ceof
j
udici
aloffi
cersbefor
ewhom t hecaseisultimatel
ytried.Andt hemosti mport
anttosafeguar
d
theaccusedagainstsubsequentvar
iat
ionsoraddi t
ions.

1. INFORMATI ONINCONI ZABECASES: -Everyinformationrel

at i
ngtothecommi ssi
onofa
cognizabl
eof fencei
fgivenor al
lytoanoffi
cer-i
n-chargeofaPol iceStati
on,shal
lbereducedto
writ
ingbyhi m orunderhisdirecti
onandber eadov ertotheinformant .Ever
ysuchinfor
mat i
on,
whethergiveni nwri
ti
ngorr educedtowriti
ngasaf or
esaid,shal
l besignedbythepersongivi
ng
i
t.Theof f
icersrecei
vingmaket heent
ri
esoft hesubst ancethereofintheprescr
ibedRegist
er
avai
lablewithhim.

2. Copyoft
heI
nfor
mat
ionasr
ecor
dedshal
lbegi
venf
ort
hwi
thf
reeofcostt
othei
nfor
mant
.

3. Refusalt
orecor
dtheinfor
mation:
-Ifanyof
fi
cer-
in-
chargeofpoli
cestat
ionr
efusestorecord
thei
nformati
onthei
nformantmaysendt osubst
anceofsuchinformati
ontotheSupdtt
.Of
Poli
ceconcernwhofurt
heronhissati
sfacti
onwil
li
nvesti
gatet
hecasehimselfordir
ecttohis
subordi
nate.

4. Thei
nfor
mati
ongi
ventoPol
i
ceOff
iceandr
educedt
owrit
ingasrequi
redundert
hesecti
on
i
scall
edFI
R.Whenanyi
nfor
mati
ondi
scosi
ngcogni
zabl
eof
fenceisl
aidbefor
etheOffi
cerI
/c

19
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

ofaPol i
ceStati
on,hehasnoopt ionbutt
oregi
sterthecaseofthatbaseasheldinStateof
Haryanav /
sCh.BhajanLal-
1992.I
nacaseofGur pr
eetSinghv/sStateofPunj
ab-2006:-I
twas
heldthatmerel
ynon- di
scl
osureofthenamesofwi t
nessesinthedail
ydiar
yaswel lasmort
uary
regi
stercannotaff
ecttheprosecuti
onofcase.

CaseStat
eofA.P.v/sV.V.PandurangaRao-2009:Itwasheldthatstat
ementgivenont elephone
i
st obetr
eatedasFIRbecausecrypti
ctel
ephonicmessageofcogni zableof
fencereceivedby
Poli
cewouldnotconsti
tut
eFIR.Themer efactthatthet
elephoni
cmessagewasf i
rstinpoi ntof
ti
medoesnotbyi t
selfcl
othei
twithcharacterofFIR.

5. Wher eFI RislodgedandwhatObj ect:-Generall

ytheinformationaboutt heof f
ence
commi ttedi sgiventot hePol iceStat i
onoft heplaceconcer n,butitdoesnotmeant hatit
cannotbel odgedelsewher e.I nacaseofPunat iRaubev /sStateofA. P.
-1993:Thepolice
constabler efusedtor ecordt hecompal ai
ntont hegr oundthatthesai dpol i
cest ati
onhadno
terr
it
orialjurisdi
cti
onov erthepl aceofcr i
me.Anyl ackofterri
tori
aljurisdi
ctioncouldnothave
preventedt heconst ablefrom r ecordinginformationaboutt hecogni zableof f
enceand
forwardingt hesamet oconcer npolicestation.

6. Theobj ectofFIR:themainobjectoftheFI
Ristocomplainofanyoftheoff
encetoaPoli
ce
off
icersothatcriminallawcouldbeappli
ed.WheretheFI
Rwasf oundohav ebeenwri
tt
enaft
er
theinquestreportwaspr epar
edthecourthel
dthati
thaslosti
tsauthent
ici
tyi
nthecaseof
BalakaSinghv /
sSt at
eofPunj ab-
1975.

7. IMPORTANCEOFFI R:-Onconsiderat
ionit
simportantfrom ev
eryangleiti
snot i
cedthatFIR
i
sav eryi
mportantfrom t
heoccurrenceofanof f
ence.Itshoul
dbegi v
enimmedi atel
yafterthe
off
enceiscommi t
ted.Thedelayingivi
nginfor
mat i
onisv i
ewedwi t
hgravesuspici
onashel din
thecaseofModivalappa-1966.Thereisnoneedt ogivethenamesofwi tnessesorother
minutedet
ail
.

8. Dut ytor egi

sterFIR:-I
nacaseofRaj enderSi
nghKatochv /
sChandigarhAdministr
ati
on&
Others-2008, t
hatalthoughtheoffi
cer
-i
n-chargeofPoli
cestat
ionisl
egall
yboundt oregi
stera
FIRinter m ofsec.154.ItwasalsoheldinAlequePadamseeandOt hersv/sUnionofIndi
a-2007:
-thatincaseofi nactionofpoli
ceoffi
cial
sinregi
steri
ngFIRpersonaggri
evedcanadopt
modal i
tiescontainedinsec.190readwi t
h200Cr .
P.Cbylayi
ngcomplaintbef
orethemagi st
rat
e
concernt otakecogni zanceofoff
ence.

20
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

9. Del
ayi
nfi
li
ngFIR:–Del
ayingi
vi
ngFIRcanbecondonedi
fther
eissat
isf
act
oryex
planat
ion
ashel
dinApr
enjospehv
/sStat
eofKer
la-
1973.

Whet
hert
hedel
ayi
ssol
ongast
othr
owacl
oudofsuspi
cionondeedsoft
he

pr
osecut
ioncasemustbedependuponav
ari
etyofact
ors,
CaseRam Jogv
/sSt
ateofUP-
1974.

10.Delayi
nlodgi
ngFIRinrapecases:
-InSt
ateOfHimachalPradeshv/sShreekantShekar
i-
2004:Thatmeredel
ayinlodgi
ngFIRdoesnotanywayrenderprosecut
ionversi
onbrit
tl
e.

11.Power stoinv
estigate:-
Undersecti
on156t hepoliceisempower edt oinv est
igat
ei nt
oa
cogni zableoff
encewi thoutorderofaMagi str
ateorwi t
houtaf ormal fi
rsti nfor
mat i
onr epor
t.I
f
thepol icedonotinvest i
gatetheMagistratecanorderfort heinvestigationasi ncaseof
Abhy anandJhav /sDi neshChandr a-
1968.Sec.156( 2)prov i
desthatnopr oceedingofaPol i
ce
Officerinanysuchcaseshal latanystagebecal l
edi nquest i
onont hegr oundt hatthecasewas
onewhi chsuchoffi
cerwasnotempower edunderthissec.t oinvestigate,caseHar iSinghv/s
StateofUP- 2006.Sec. 156(3)Anymagi str
ateisempower edundersec. 190mayor dersuchan
i
nv estigati
on,caseBat eshwarSinghv /sStateofBihar-1992.

6.Brieft
heJuri
sdi
cti
onofcr
imi
nalCourt
sininqui
ri
es&Tr
ial
s.OR“Everyoff
enceshal
lordi
nari
l
y
beinquir
edandtri
edbycour
twit
hint
helocalli
mit
sofwhosejur
isdi
cti
onItwascommi t
ted.
”
Explaint
hestat
ementandst
atei
tsexcepti
on.

INTRODUCTI ON:–AMagi st
ratewi t
hinwhosel ocaljur
isdict
iontheof f
enceiscommi tt
edi s
competenttotakecognizanceandt otrythecase.Thej uri
sdict
ionoftheMagi st
ratedoesnot
cometoanendbyt r
ansferoft helocalit
y,wherethecrimewascommi ttedtoanotherdistr
ict
.
Thecourthavingj
uri
sdicti
ont ot r
ytheof f
encescommi ttedinpursuanceoftheconspiracycan
tryt
heoffenceofconspiracyev enifitwascommi ttedout si
deitsjuri
sdict
ionundersection177.

I
tmakesi tcl
earthatanof fenceshal
lbeinqui
redandtri
edbyacourtwit
hint
helocal
li
mits
ofwhosej ur
isdi
cti
ontheof fencewascommi tt
ed.B.Patnai
kv/sSmt.
Binand,
1970,i
twasheld
thatcour
tdecidedthatoffencesshallbetr
iedbyacourtwithi
nthel
ocalli
mit
sofwhose
j
urisdi
cti
ontheof f
encewascommi tt
ed.

21
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

1. Placeofinquir
yortr
ial
incertai
nmat ters:
-Sec. 178,
wheni
tisuncert
aininwhichofsev er
al
l
ocalareasanof f
enceswascommi tted.Theof fenceiscommi
t t
edpart
lyinonelocalareaand
part
lyinanother
.Whereanof f
enceiscont i
nuingoneandcontinuestobecommi ttedinmor e
l
ocalareasthanone.Thenitmaybei nquiredort r
iedbyacour
thavingj
urisdi
cti
onov eranyof
suchlocalar
eas.Stat
eofM. P.v/
sK.P.Ghiy ar
a-1957.

2. Offencetri
abl
ewhereacti sdone:-Anacti sanoffencebyr easonofanyt
hingwhichhas
beendoneandofaconsequencewhi chhasensuedt heoffencemaybei nqui
redintoort
riedby
acourtwithi
nwhoselocaljur
isdi
ctionsucht hinghasbeendoneorsuchconsequencehas
ensuedundersec.179.CaseLal chandv /
sSt ate-
1961issuitableexampleagangwascr eat
ed
fordacoi
tyinadist
ri
ctbutwascommi t
tedinanotherdistr
ict
,itwasdecidedthatt
hecasecan
betri
edbyt hecour
tofanyoft hetwodi st
ri
cts.

3. Placeoftrial
actisof
fencebyreasonofrelat
iontootherof fence:
-Whenanactisan
off
encebyr easonofitst
oanyotheractwhichisalsoanof fenceorwhi chwouldbeanoffence
i
fthedoorwer ecapableofcommitti
nganof f
encet heoff
encewhi chi
sdonef i
rstmaybe
i
nquir
edintoort r
iedbyacourtwi
thinwhoselocal j
uri
sdi
ctioneitheractwasdone,under
sec.
180.MunnaLal v
/sStat
eofRajasthan-
1964:commi tt
ingt heftandrecei
vi
ngstol
enpropert
y,
suchmat t
ercanbet ri
edbyacourtofanyofthetwopl aces.

4. Placeoftri
alincaseofcer t
ainoff
ences:-
Anyof f
enceofbei ngathugormur dercommitted
byathugofdacoi t
y,ofdacoitywithmurderofbelongingtoagangofdacoi tsorofescapi
ng
fr
om custodymaybei nqui
redint
oort r
iedbyaCour twithi
nwhosel ocalj
uri
sdict
iontheoff
ence
wascommi ttedortheaccusedper sonisfound.Undersec.181.JaswantSinghv/sEmperor,
1918,i
namat t
erofabductionofmar r
iedwomanf orthepurposeofunlawfuli
ntercour
se,
itcan
betri
edthatcourtwithinwhoselocalj
urisdi
cti
onthewomanwasdet ai
ned.

5. Of fencescommi tt
edbyLet terset c:-Anyof f encewhi chi ncludescheatingmayi ft
he
deceptionispracticedbymeansofl ettersot el
ecommuni cationmessagebei nquir
edintoor
tri
edbyanycour twi t
hinwhosel ocal j
ur i
sdict i
onsuchl ettersormessageswer esentorwer e
receiv
edandmayof f
enceofcheat inganddi shonest yincludingdel iv
eryofpr opert
ymaybe
i
nqui r
edi nt
oort r
iedbyacour twithinwhosel ocal juri
sdictionthepr oper
tywasdel i
veredbythe
persondecei v
edorwasr eceiv
edbyt heaccusedper sonundersec. 182.Tekumal laMuneiahv/s
C.B.Ammanamma, 1991:itwasacaseofbi gamyt hecour theldt hecomplainantcouldbe
entert
ainedbyt hecour thavingterri
tor i
aljurisdictionov erthatpl ace.

22
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

6. Of f
encecommi t
tedonjourneyorvoyage:-Whenanof f
enceiscommi tt
edwhi
letheperson
byoragainstwhom orthethi
ngi nrespectofwhichtheoff
enceiscommi tt
edisi
nthecourseof
perfor
mingaj our
neyorvoyagetheoffencemaybei nqui
redint
oort r
iedbyacour
tthroughor
i
ntowhosel ocalj
uri
sdi
cti
onthatpersonort hi
ngpassedinthecourseofthatj
our
neyorv oy
age,
u/sec.
183.

7. Placeoftri
alf
orof fencestriablet
ogether:
-Sec.184say s,
wher etheoffencecommi t
tedby
anypersonaresucht hathemaybechar gedwithandt r
iedatonet ri
alforeachsuchoffenceby
vi
rtueoftheprovi
sionsofseec. 219orsec. 220orsec.221.Theof f
enceorof fencescommitt
ed
byseveralper
sonsar esucht hattheymaybechar gedwi t
handtr i
edtogetherbyv i
rt
ueofthe
provi
si
onofsec.223.Case: Pursottam Dalmiyav/sStateofW. B.
-1961.

8. OffencesCommi tt
edOutsideIndi
a:-Whenoffencesi
scommi t
tedoutsi
deI ndiabyacit
izen
ofIndi
a,whetheronthehi
ghseasorel sewhereorbyapersonnotbei ngsuchci t
izenonany
shi
porai r
craf
tregi
ster
edinIndia,
hemaybedeal twi t
hinrespectofsuchoffenceasi fi
thad
beencommi tt
edatanyplaceinIndiaatwhichhemaybef ound.

7.DI
SCUSSTHEJOI
NDEROFCHARGESUNDERCODEOFCRI
MINALPROCEDURE.

INTRODUCTI ON:-Theobj ectoftheruleembodi edinthesec.218ofCr .P.C.

,istoensur
eaf ai
r
tri
alandtoseet hatt heaccusedi snotbewilderedorperplextoconfusebyhavingbeenasked
todefendsev er
al unconnect edchargesordisti
nctoffenceslumpedt oget
herinonechar
georin
separatecharges.Wewi llr
eadt herul
esrelati
ngtojoinderofchargesdescri
bedindif
fer
entpart
ofthissecti
on.Ther eisnoexcept iontotherulethatthereshoul
dbesepar at
echargeforeach
offence.Thedet ailstudyoft hi
ssecti
onisasunder :
-

DEFINITION: –Forev er
ydist
inctoffenceofwhichanypersoni
saccusedthereshal
lbea
separatechargeandev erychargeshal l
betr
iedseparat
ely.Wher
etheaccusedpersonbyan
appli
cationinwri
ting,sodesir
esandt heMagist
rat
eisofopini
onthatsuchpersoni
snotl
ikel
y
tobepr ejudi
cedthereby,Magistr
atemayt r
ytogetheral
loranynumberofthechargesf
amed
againstsuchperson.

1. EffectofCont
raventi
onofSec.
218:
-Theef
fectofthecont
rav
enti
onoftheprovi
sionsoft
his
sec.hasbeenconsideredbyt
heSupremeCour
tinfoll
owingnumberofcases:
-Sushi
lKumarv/s

23
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

JoyShankar -1971:Itwasheldthatchargesunder408and477AofI PCcoul dbet ri

edt ogether.
I
nt hi
scasesev eralper
sonsaccusedonsev er
alit
emsofembezzlementwer et r
iedjointly.Ther
e
wasnof ailureofjusti
ceinconsequenceoft hejoi
nderofchar
geshadoccur red.InV.N.
KAMDARv /sDELHIMUNI CI
PALITY-1973:Itwasheld,“
thatt
heprovisi
onsofsec.218t o224
wouldindicatethatseparatechargeandsepar at
etri
alf
orsuchdisti
nctoff
encei sthenor mal
rul
eandj ointtri
alisanexcepti
onwhent heaccusedhavecommittedseparateoffence. ”

2. FailuretoExplaininjur
iesont heaccused:
-Whentheprosecut
ionfail
stoexplain
sati
sfactori
lytheinjur
iessustainedbytheaccusedtherear
enumberofj udi
cial
pronouncement sont hispoint
.CaseSt ateofGuj
ratv/sBaiFat
ima-1975:I
twashel dthatt
he
accusedhadi nfli
ctedtheinjur
iesont hemember softhepr
osecut
ionpartyinexerci
seofthe
ri
ghtofsel f
-defence.

3. Threeof fencesofthesameki ndwithinyearmaybechar gedtoget her:

-undersecti
on219of
Cr.P.C.whenaper sonisaccusedofmor eoffencesthanoneoft hesameki ndcommi tted
withi
nthespaceoft welvemont hsfrom thefir
sttothel astofsuchof fences, hemaybechar ged
withandtriedatonet ri
alforanynumberoft hem notexceedi ngthree.Pr ovi
sionsofsectionare
onlyenabli
ngpr ovi
sions,i
tapplieswher eoffencesareoft hesameki ndbuti tdoesnotappl y
whereof f
encesar enotoft hesameki ndsuchascr i
mi nalbreachoft rustandf al
sif
icat
ionof
accounts.Rahmatv /sStateofU.P. -1980.

4. Tr i
alforthanoneoffence:-I
finoneseriesofActssoconnectedtogetherastoformt he
samet ransacti
onmor eoffencesthanonear ecommittedbythesameper son,hemaybe
chargedwi t
handt r
iedatonet ri
alforever
ysuchoffenceaspr ov
idedundersecti
on,220oft he
Cr.P.C.CaseKr i
shnaMur thyv/sAbduSubhan-1965.CaseofKanshi ram v/sJhunj
hunwal a-
1935,wi t
hthesamei twasnecessar ytoascert
ainwhethertheyaresoconnectedtogetherast o
constit
uteawhol ewhichcanpr operl
ybedescr i
bedasat r
ansacti
on.

5. Wher ei
tisdoubtful
whatoffencehasbeencommi tted:–Sec.221provi
desfort
hecases
whereiti
sdoubtfulwhatoff
encehasbeencommi tted.Itappl
iestothecasesinwhi
chthefact
s
arenotdoubtf
ulbuttheappl
icati
onoflawtothefactsisdoubtful
ashel di
nacaseofAbdul
Hami d-
1935.Thissec.appl
ieswherethedoubti
saboutt henatureoftheoff
enceandnotabout
thefact
sasheldincaseJatinderKumarv/sStat
eofDel hi-
1992.

6. Whent
heof
fencepr
ovedi
ncl
udedi
nof
fencechar
ged:
–Sec.
222consi
der
edt
heconv
ict
ion

24
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

ofmi norof
fenceincl
udedintheoff
encechargedi
neitheroft
wocases, wher
etheoffence
chargedconsistsofsev
eralpar
ti
cular
sandcombinati
oni spr
ovedbuttheremai
ningparti
cul
ars
arenotprovedasheldinMaungBav /
stheKing-
1938.Andwher ethefact
sareprovedwhich
reducetheoffencechar
gedt oaminoroff
enceasheldincaseof,Emperorv/
sAbdulWahab-
1945.

7. Whatper sonsmaybechar gedjoi

ntl
y:-Undersec.
223joi
nttr
ailofsev eralpersonsis
permi
ssibl
eandappl iesonlytotri
alsandnott oi
nquir
es.Ajoi
nttr
ialofsev eralpersonsunder
thi
ssecti
onisnotv i
ti
at edmerelybythefactsthatatt
heendofthet r
ialthef actsfoundhappen
tobedif
ferentfrom t
hoseont hebasisofwhi chthechar
geswereor i
ginallyframedashel din
caseofTri
lokchandv /
sRex-1949.ItwasalsoheldincaseofA.R.
Aut ul
ayv /sR.S.Nayak-
1988.

8. Withdr
awalofremainingchargesonconv i
cti
onononeofsev eralcharges:–Whenachar ge
cont
aini
ngmoreheadst hanonei sframedagai nstthesameper sonandwhenaconv i
cti
onhas
beenhadononeormor eoft hem, t
hecompl ainantort heOf f
icerconducti
ngt hepr
osecution
maywi t
htheconsentoftheCour twithdrawt heremai ningchargeorchar ges.Thecourtofit
s
ownaccordmayst ayt
hei nquir
yintoort ri
alofsuchchar ges.Courtmaypr oceedwiththe
i
nquir
yintoort
ri
alofthechar georchar gessowi thdrawn.

8.Di
scusst
hepr
ovi
sionsoft
rai
lbef
oreaCour
tofSessi
on.

I
NTRODUCTI ON: –Theprocedureoftrialofoff
encesbeforecour
thasbeendescribedinsecti
on
225tosec.237oft heCri
minalProcedureCode-1973.Hereiti
simport
antthatanymat t
erdoes
notcomedi r
ectlyfortr
ial
befor
et heCour tofSessi
ons.Suchmatteri
scommi tt
edf ort
ri
alto
CourtofSession.Anymat teri
scommi tt
edtoCour tofSessi
onwhenithastheexclusi
ve
j
uri
sdict
iontot r
ysuchof f
ence.

1. CONDUCTI
ONOFTRIAL:
-Inev
erytr
ial
bef
oreaCourtofSessi
on,t
hepr
osecut
ionshal
l
beconduct
edbyaPubl
i
cPr
osecut
oraslai
ddowninsec.
225ofthecode.

2. OPENINGTHECASEFORPROSECUTI ON:-Whentheaccusedappear
sorbr oughtby
beforet
heCourtinpur
suanceofacommi tmentofthecaseundersecti
on209theprosecutor
shall
openhiscasebydescri
bingthechargebroughtagai
nsttheaccusedandstat
ingbywhat
evi
dencehepurposestoprovetheguil
toftheaccusedundersec.226ofCr.P.C.caseof
Hukam Singhv/
sStateofRajast
han-2001.

25
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

3. DISCHARGE: –Ifupont heconsi der

ationoft herecordofthecaseandthedocument s
submitt
edtherewit
handaf terhearingthesubmi ssi
onoft heaccusedandtheprosecuti
onin
thi
sbehalf,
theJudgeconsi dersthatthereisnotsuf f
icientgroundforpr
oceedi
ngagainstthe
accusedheshalldischarget heaccusedandr ecordhisr easonsfordoi
ngso.Asheldincaseof
T.V.
Sharmav /sR.Meer i
ah-1980.Itiscalledchargear gument s;cour
thastoconsi
derthe
completecasecarefull
ybef oregivi
ngor dertodischar geStateofJ&Kv /
sRomeshchandr a-
1997.
Thesearetheprovisionsofsec. 227.

4. Framingofchar ge:
–Whi leframingchargescourtshal
lonlyseethatt
hereisaprima
faciecaseagainstaccusedornot.Atthisj
uncturether
eisnoneedf orprai
singwit
nessesas
heldincaseofSt at
eofM. P.v/sS.B.Johri
-2000.Wher et
hejudgef r
amesanycharge, t
he
chargeshallbereadandexplainedtotheaccusedandaccusedshal lbeaskedwhet herhe
pleadsguil
tyoftheoffencechargedorclaimst obetri
edaspr ov
idedinsecti
on228ofCr .P.
C.

5. Convi
ctiononPl eaofGuil
ty:–Iftheaccusedpleadsguil
tythej
udgeshallr
ecordthe
pl
eaandmayi nhi sdiscreti
onconvi
cthimt hereon.Thepleaofguil
tyonl
yamount stoan
admissi
onthattheaccusedcommi tt
edt heactsall
egedagainsthi
m.Itwasheldincaseof
TyronNazarat
hv /sStateofMaharashtra-1989.Thi
sismor esoincasepersonstr
iedjoi
ntl
y
whensomepl eadgui l
tyandt heot
hersclaimtobet r
ied,
caseofBant r
aKunjana-
1960.These
areprov
isi
onsav ail
ablei
nsec.229ofCr .P.C.

6. Dat eforProsecuti
onEvidence:
-Ift
heaccusedr efusest opleadordoesnotpl eador
clai
mst obet ri
edorisnotconv i
ctedundersec.
229, t
heJudgeshal lf
ixadat ef ort
he
exami nati
onofwi t
nessesandmayont heappli
cati
onoft hepr osecutionissueanyprocessf or
compel li
ngt heattendanceofanywi t
nessortheproductionofanydocumentorot herthing.
CaseMuki padMandal v/sAbdulJabbar-
1973,i
tisthedut yofcour tt
ot akeallnecessarysteps
tocompel theattendanceofwitnesses.Theaccusedcannotbeacqui ttedont hegroundof
fail
ureoft hewi t
nessestoappearbef or
ethecourt,undersec.230.

7. Ev
idenceforProsecut
ion:
-Onthedat efixed,thejudgeshallproceedt
ot akeallsuch
evi
denceasmaybepr oducedinsuppor
toft heprosecut i
onsec.231.whenanywi tnessappears
beforet
hecourtther
eshallbenodelayaspossi bleinhisexami nati
onbutifanydel ayhappens
i
nt heexaminat
ionofanywi t
nessthemerelyont hisgroundt heprosecuti
onmattercannotbe
suspendedcaseofBuntyurfGudduv /sStateofM. P-2004.

26
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

8. Acquit
tal
:–I faf
tert
aki
ngt heevidencefortheprosecuti
onexamini
ngtheaccused
andhearingtheprosecuti
onandhedef enceont hepointtheJudgeconsi
dersthatther
eisno
evi
dencet hatt
heaccusedcommi t
tedt heoffencethejudgeshallr
ecordanorderofacqui
tt
al
undersec.232.Theaccusedcaneitherbeconv ict
edoracquittal
butnotdi
scharged.

9. Enter
ingUponDef ence: -Wher ethaccusedi snotacqui t
tedundersec.
232heshal l
be
call
edupont oenteronhi sdef enceandadduceanyev i
dencehemayhav ei
nsupportthereof
.It
theaccusedputsi nanywr it
tenst at
ementt hej
udgeshal lfi
leitwi t
htherecord.I
ftheaccuse
appli
esfortheissueofanypr ocessf orcompel l
i
ngt heattendanceofanywi t
nessorproducti
on
ofanydocumentort hi
ngt hejudgeshal lissuesuchper sonunl essheconsiderssuch
appli
cati
onforthepur poseofv exat
ionordel ayorfordefeatingt heendsofjusti
ce.CaseState
ofMPv /sBadri Yadav-2006.Thesear etheprovisi
onsinsec. 233.

10. Ar
guments:
-Whent heexaminat
ionofwi
tnessesforthedefenceiscompletet he
prosecut
orshal
lsum uphiscaseandaccusedshal
lbeent i
tl
edtoreply.Duri
nghisprocess
whereanypointofl
awisraisedbytheaccusedt
heprosecutionsmazywi ththeper
mi ssionof
j
udgemakehi ssubmissi
onswi t
hregardt
osuchpointoflawundersec.234.I ti
scalled
arguments.

11. Judgment:
-Af
terhear
ingbot
hthepar
ti
esthejudgeshal
lgi
veajudgmenti
nthecase
undersec.235.
Case:
All
uddinMianShari
fMi
anv/sStat
eofBihar-
1989.

12. Prev
iousConv icti
on:–Iftheaccusedischar
geofprevi
ousconvi
cti
onandtheaccused
doesnotadmitt hatt
henj udgemayt akeevi
denceinr
espectoft
heall
egedprev
iousconvi
cti
on
andrecordafindingthereonundersec.236.

13. Procedureincasesinsti
tutedunderSec.199: -
Sec.237ofthecodepr ov i
desthe
procedur
ef ortri
alofsuchmat t
erswhi chhavebeeni nsti
tut
edundersec. 199(2).Sec.199(2)
provi
desforpr osecut
ionofdefamat ionmatters.Ifanymat t
ersofdefamat i
onisal l
egedtohave
beencommi t
tedagainstthePresidentofIndia,Vi
ce-Pr
esident,Gov
ernorofSt ate,Admini
strat
or
ofUT, Mi
nisterofUnionorStateorAnyot herPublicservant.I
fduri
ngt r
ialcourtfi
ndsscopeof
acquit
tal
hemaypasssuchor ders.

27
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

9.Forever
ydi
sti
nctof
fenceofwhi
chanypersonisaccusedther
eshal
lbeaseparat
echarge
andever
ysuchchar
geshallbet
ri
edsepar
atel
y.Expl
ainarether
eanyexcept
ionst
othisr
ule,
if
sowhat?

INTRODUCTION:-Provi
sionsrelat
ingt
ochargear eai
medatgi vingcompleteinfor mati
ontothe
accusedabouttheoff
enceofwhi chheisbeingcharged.Itgivestheaccuratepr eci
se
i
nformati
onabouttheaccusat i
onsmadeagai nsthi
m.Ev erychargeshallstat
et heoffencewit
h
whichtheaccusedischarged.Thechargeshallbewrit
teninthelanguageoft heCour t
.The
l
anguageofthechargeshoul dbespecif
icandclear.

WHATI SCHARGE: –Sec.2(b)ofCr .

P.C.-
1973pr ovidesthedefini
ti
onofchar gebutitisneither
defi
nit
ionasperdicti
onarymeaningnori tisdirectinganymeani ng.Itonlysaysthat,“Charge
i
nducesanyheadofchar gewhent hechargecont ainsmor eheadsthanone.”Char geissucha
writ
tenstat
ementoft hei
nformationofof fenceagai nstt
heaccusedpersonwhi chcont ai
nst he
groundsofchargealong-
withti
me, place,personandt hi
ngsinrel
ati
ontowhi choffenceis
commi tt
ed.Thechargeisapreciseformul ati
onoft hespecif
icaccusati
onofanof fenceagai nst
theaccusedperson.Accusedprepar eshisdef encesont hebasisofi
t.

Component
sofChar
ge:
-Sec.
211say
sthat
:-

1. Ev
erychar
geshal
lst
atet
heof
fencewi
thwhi
cht
heaccusedi
schar
ged.

2. I
fthel
awwhichcr
eatestheoff
encegi
vesi
tanyspeci
fi
cname,
thesamemaybedescr
ibed
byt
hatname,
li
kethef
t,r
obbery,
dacoi
tyormur
deret
c.

3. Ifl
awdoesnotgiv
eanyspeci
fi
cnamesomuchoft
hedef
ini
ti
onoft
heof
fencemustbe
st
atedforgi
vi
ngthenoti
cet
oaccused.

4. TheLawandsect
ionoft
hel
awagai
nstwhi
cht
heof
fencei
scommi
tt
edshal
lbement
ioned
i
nthecharge.

5. Thefactt
hatt
hechargei
smadeisequi
val
enttoast
atementt
hatev
eryl
egal
condi
ti
on
requi
redbyl
awtoconst
it
utet
heoff
enceisf
ulf
il
led.

28
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

6. Thechar
geshallbewrit
teninthel
anguageoft
hecourt.CaseofKr
ishanv
/sSt
ateofKer
la-
1958.
Thecourtsai
dthatchargeshoul
dbeinCourt
’sl
anguage.

7. Theprev
iousconvi
cti
onifanyoft
heaccusedmustbest
atedi
nthechar
gei
.e.pl
ace,
dat
e
andthef
actoftheoff
ence.

Accor
dingt
oSec.212:
-Par
ti
cul
arsast
oti
mepl
aceandper
son:
-

1.Thet
imeofcommi
ssi
onoft
heof
fencebegi
veni
nthechar
ge.

2.Thepl
aceofcommi
ssi
onoft
heof
fencemayal
sober
ecor
dedi
nchar
ge.

3.Theper
sonagai
nstwhom ort
hingi
nrespectofwhi
chi
twascommi
tt
ed.

4.Themannerofcommi
tt
ingof
fencemustbest
atedi
nthechar
geu/
s213.

5.Thewor
dsmustbeofsenseofl
awunderwhi
chof
fencei
spuni
shabl
eu/
s214.

Eff
ectofEr rors:–Secti
on215oft hecodesayst hatthereshouldbenoer r
orinstat
ingei
ther
theof f
enceort hepart
icul
arsrequir
edtobestatedi nthecharge,t
her eshouldalsobeno
omi ssi
ont ostatetheoff
enceorthosepart
icul
arswhi chatanyst ageoft hecaseasmat eri
al
unlesst heaccusedwasi nfactmisl
edbysucher rororomi ssi
onwhi chmayr esult
sthefai
lure
ofjusti
ce.Thensuchchar geshallbeconsi
deredf ault
yandt hetr
ialont hebasisofsuchcharge
shallalsobef aul
ty.

CourtMayal
tert
hechar
ge:Undersec.
216,
anycour
tmayal
teroraddt
oanychar
geatanyt
ime
bef
orethej
udgmenti
spronounced.

29
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Recal
lofWit
nesseswhenchar geal
ter
ed:
-undersect
ion217,wheneverthechar
geisalter
edor
addedtobytheCourtaftert
hecommencementofthetri
althepr
osecutorandtheaccusedshal
l
beall
owedtorecal
lorre-summonedandexaminethealt
erati
onandadditi
onanywitnesswho
mayhavebeenexami ned.

Separatechargesfordisti
nctoff
ence:–Theobj
ectofsec.
218istoensureafairt
ri
alandtosee
thattheaccusedisnotbewi l
deredbyhavi
ngbeenaskedtodefendseveral
unconnect
ed
chargesordisti
nctoffenceslumpedtoget
heri
nonecharge,caseofAf
t abAhmadKhanv /
s
StateofHydrabad-1954.

Sameof f
encesofsamekindwi t
hinoney earmaybechar gedtogether:
–sec.219pr ov
idesthat
off
encespunishabl
eundersec.
379and380I PCshallbedeemedt obeof fencesoft
hesame
ki
nd.Cri
mi nal
breachoft
rustandfalsi
fi
cationofaccounts,whentheoffenceiscommittedbya
si
ngleaccusedandisnotappli
cablewheresev er
alpersonsaretr
iedjoi
ntly.

Tri
alforthanoneof fence:
-Sec.220pr
ovidesIfi
noneseriesofactssoconnectedtoget
heras
toformthesamet ransact
ion,moreof
fencesthanonearecommi t
tedbyt
hesameper son,he
maybechar gedwith,andtri
edatonetri
alforev
erysuchoffence.CaseSt
ateofBiaharv/
s
Simranj
itSingh-1987.

Framingofchar gewherei
tisdoubtfulwhatof
fencehasbeencommi tt
ed:-sec.
221oft
hecode
provi
desforthef r
amingofchargeinthosematter
swherethereisdoubtofwhatoff
encehas
beencommi t
t ed.Insuchmatt
ers,chargeshal
lbeframedasfoll
ows:-

Al
lof
fencescommi
tt
edasar
esul
toft
henat
ureofAct
.

All
oranyofsuchof f
enceschar
gedintheal
ter
nat
ivewi
thhav
ingcommi
tt
edsomeoneoft
he
sai
doffences.Gov
erdhanv/sKani
l
al-
1953.

Whenof f
encepr ov
edi ncl
udedi noffenceschar ged:-Whenapersonischar gedwit
hanof f
ence
consi
sti
ngofsev eralpart
icul
arsoranof f enceandf act
sareprovedwhichr educei
ttoami nor
wil
lbeconvictedofthemi nor,caseofSt ateofMahar asht
rav/sRajendraJawanmal Gandhi-
1997,Sangarobi
naSr eenuv /
sSt at
eofA. P.-1997.Thesearet
hepr ovi
sionsofSec.222ofthe

30
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

code.

Withdrawal
ofremainingchar
gesonconvict
ionononeofsev eral
char ges:-Sec.
224ofthecode
saysthatwhenachargecontaini
ngmoreheadst hanoneisfr
amedagai nsthesameperson
andwhenaconv ict
ionhasbeenhadoneormor eofthem t
heapplicantorprosecut
ionwit
ht he
consentofcour
twithdrawtheremai
ningchargesorcourtofi
tsownaccor dmaystaytheinqui
ry
ortri
al.

10.WhatdoyoumeanbyJudgment?Whatar
ethecont
ent
sofj
udgment
?Di
scusst
hepower
s
ofHighcour
ttoconf
ir
m deat
hsent
ence?

INTROUDCTI ON:–Afterhear
ingboththeparti
estheJudgegiveaj udgmenti
nt hecase.The
j
udgementi never
ytri
al i
nanycri
minalcourtofi
tsownj ur
isdi
cti
onshallbepronouncedinthe
opencourtbythepresidi
ngoffi
ceri
mmedi atel
yaftert
heterminati
onofthetri
aloratsome
subsequentti
meofwhi chnoti
ceshall
begi ventothepart
iesortheirpl
eader
s.

1.Secti
on353oft hecr.procedurecode-1973pr ovides:-
Thejudgmentinev er
ytri
alinany
cri
minalcourtinit
sownj uri
sdict
ionshallbepronouncedi nopencour tbythepresi
dingoffi
cer
i
mmedi atel
yaf t
ertheter
mi nati
onofthet r
ialoratsomesubsequentt i
meofwhi chnoticeshal
l
begiventothepar t
iesortheirpl
eaders.CaseAnt honyv /sStat
e-1993.Itwasalsoheldina
caseofYelchuriManoharv /sStateofA.P-2005,thatelectr
onicmediacannotprovideany
guidi
ngfactors.

2.Languageandcont entsofJudgment :–Thatev eryj

udgmentshallbewr i
tt
eni nt helanguage
oftheCour t.I
tmayal socontainthepointorpointsfordeter
minati
on,t
hedeci siont hereonand
thereasonsf orthedeci si
on,aspr ovi
dedinsec.354oft hecode.CaseofRam Bal iv/sSt at
eof
U.P.-2004.Thel anguageandt hecontentsofthejudgmentmustbsel f
-containedandmustal so
showt hatt
hecour thasappl i
edi t
smi ndtothefactsandtheev i
dence,
ashel dincaseof
NiranjanV/ sState-1978.Fail
ur etosi
gningofjudgmentatt heti
meofpr onounci ngitisonlya
procedur al
irr
egularit
ycur abl
easperi nst
ructi
onsprovidedinthecode.

3.JudgmentofMet r
opolit
anMagi st
rat
e:–Thatinst
eadofrecordi
ngajudgmentinthemanner
provi
dedamet r
opoli
tanmagi str
ateshall
recordt
heseri
alnumberofthecase,
thedateof
commi ssi
onoftheoffencealong-wi
ththenameofthecomplainant
.Thenameoft heaccused
personhispar
entageandr esi
dencement i
oningt
hepleaandexaminati
onofaccused.Thedat
e

31
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

off
inal
ordermayal
sober
ecor
dedaspr
ovi
sionsl
aiddowni
nsec.
355.

4.Orderf ornoti
fyi
ngaddressofpreviouslyconvi
ctedof f
ender:–Sec.356oft hecodepr ovi
des
that
,whenanyhav ingbeenconvictedbyacour ti
nI ndiaofanof fencepunishable.I
fsuch
convi
ctioni ssetasideonappealorotherwisesuchor dershallbecomev oid.StateGovt.
,can
maker ulest ocar
ryouttheprovi
sionsrelati
ngtothenot i
ficat
ionofr esi
dence.

5.Ordertopaycompensati
on:-
Thequant
um ofcompensationist
obedet er
minedbytakingi
nto
consider
ati
onthenatur
eofthecri
me,inj
urysuff
eredandthecapaci
tyoftheconvi
cttopayin
caseofMani shJal
anv/sStat
eofKarnat
ka-2007.Thesearet
heprovi
sionsofthesect
ion357.

6.Schemef orcompensati
ont
ov i
cti
m:-I
neveryst
atewit
hthecoordi
nat
ionwit
hthecentral
Gov t
.,shallpr
epareaschemeforprovi
dingf
undsfort
hepurposeofcompensati
ont
ot hev i
cti
m
orhisdependent swhohavesuff
eredlossori
njur
yasaresul
tofthecri
meandwhor equire
rehabil
itat
ionundersec.
357A.

7.Compensat i
ontopersonsgroundlessl
yar rest
ed:–Sec.358pr ovi
desthatwheneverany
personcausesapoliceoffi
certoarr
estanot herpersonifi
tappearstotheMagist
ratebywhom
thecaseisheardthatther
ewasnosuf fi
cientgroundofcausingsucharrest
.TheMagistrat
e
mayawar dsuchcompensat ionnotexceeding1000/ -r
upeesasheldincaseofPar modKumar
v/sGolekha1986.

8.Ordertopaycostsinnon-
cognizabl
ecases:–Sec.359saysthatwhenev eranycomplai
ntofa
non-cogni
zableof
fenceismadetoacour t,
thecour
tifitconv
ictstheaccusedcanor dert
opay
thepenalt
yalong-
withcosti
ncurr
edbyt hecomplai
nantandincaseofdef aultofpay
mentt he
accusedcansentencesimpl
eimpr i
sonmentforaperiodnotexceeding30day s.

9.Ordert
or el
easeonprobat i
onofgoodconductaf t
eradmoniti
on:-Sec.360saysthatthis
sect
ionisapieceofbeneficentl
egisl
ation.Itappli
esonlyt
of i
rstoffenders.I
tenablesthecour
t
undercert
aincir
cumstancest or
eleaset heaccusedwhohasbeenconv ict
edonprobationof
goodconductasi nacaseofVedPar kashv/sStateofHaryana-1981.

10.Speci
alr
easonst
ober
ecor
dedi
ncer
tai
ncases:
–Wher
einanycaset
hecour
tcoul
dhav
e

32
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

dealtwi
thanaccusedpersonundertheprovi
sionsofoff
endersActayout hf
ul of
fendermay
tr
iedbyanyotherlawfortheti
mebeinginfor
cef orthet
reat
menttrai
ningorr ehabi
li
tati
onof
youthf
ulof
fendersasheldincaseofNannav/sSt at
eofRajast
han-
1989, undersec.361.

11.Courtnott oal
terJudgment:
-Accordi
ngt osect
ion362ofthecodethatanyot herl
awforthe
ti
mebeingi nforcenocourtwhenithassigneditsj
udgmentorf i
nal
orderdisposingofacase
shall
alt
erorr evi
ewt hesameexcepttocorrectacl
eri
calorar
ithmeti
caler
ror,caseofNaresh&
other
sv/sSt ateofU.P.-
1981.

12.Copyofthejudgmenttobegiv
entot heaccusedandotherper
sons:–Sect
ion363sayst
hat
acopyofthejudgmentshalli
mmediatel
yaftert
hepronouncementofthej
udgmentbegiv
ento
hi
mf reeofcost
, ashel
dincaseofLadli
ParsadZutsi
-1932.

13.Judgmentwhent obet r
ansl
ated:
–Sec.364prov i
desthattheori
ginalj
udgmentshal
lbefi
l
ed
withtherecordofpr
oceedingsandwher
etheor i
ginali
srecordedindiff
erentl
anguagef
rom
thatofcourtandsorequi
resitmaybetr
anslat
edint othelanguageoftheCourt.

14.CourtofSessi
ontosendcopyoff
indi
ngandsentencetoDist
rictMagi
str
ate:
–Inthecase
tri
edbythecourtofsessi
onoraCJM t
hecourtorsuchmagist
rateasthecasemaybeshall
forwar
dacopyofi t
sorhisfi
ndi
ngandsentencei
fanytotheDist
rictMagi
str
ateassai
dinsec.
365ofthecode.

14Submi ssi
onofdeat hsentencesforconfi
rmati
on:-
Sec.
366WhenaCour tofSessionpassesa
sentenceofdeaththeproceedingsshallbesubmit
tedtoH/C,itcannotbeexecutedunlessiti
s
confir
medbyH/ C.Sec.371pr ocedur
elaiddownthattheProperoffi
cerwi
thoutdelayaftert
he
orderofconfi
rmationorotherorderhasbeenmadebyH/ Csendacopyoft heorderunderseal
ofH/ Cdulyat
testedtoS.Court

11.Exami
net
helawrelat
ingt
oappeal
incr
imi
nal
case.Makeadi
ff
erencebet
weenAppeal
&
Revi
sioni
ncr
imi
nalcases.

INTRODUCTION:-Appealisanimport
antremedyforper
son’sdissati
sfi
edfr
om judgmentfi
nding
andordersofthetri
alcourt
.Undersect
ion372oftheCr.
P.C.,
itisprovi
dedthatrel
ati
onto
appeali
tisnecessarytoknowthatnoappealshal
lli
efr
om anyj udgmentororderofacri
minal

33
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

courtexceptaspr
ovi
dedbythi
scodeoranyotherl
awforti
mebeinginf
orce,
caseGari
kapat
i
v/sSubhashcoudhar
i-
1957.Howev
ertheprov
isi
onsregar
dingmaki
nganappealar
ethe
fol
lowing:
-

1.Appealfr
om or
dersrequir
ingsecur
it
yorrefusal
toacceptorrejecti
ngsuretyf
orkeeping
peaceorgoodbehavior
:–Anyper sonwhohasbeenor der
edt ogiv esecur
it
yforkeepi
ngthe
peaceorforgoodbehavi
ororwhoi saggr
ievedbyanyorderrefusingtoacceptorrej
ect
inga
suret
yonthebasisofsec.373.

2.Appealsfrom Convi
ctions:–Accordingtosecti
on374ofcodet hatanypersonconvi
ctedona
tr
ial
byaH/ Cinitsext
raordinar
yorigi
nalcri
minalj
urisdi
ctionmayappealtoSupr
emeCour t
si
milaranypersonconv i
ctedbysessionjudgeoronat ri
alhel
dbyanyothercourtwhi
ch
sent
enceori mprisonmentismor ethan7y earsmayappeal toHi
ghcourt.CasePanchiv
/s
Stat
eofU. P.
-1998,InC.Gopinathanv/sStateofKerala-
1991

3.AppealbyStateagainstsentence:–Undersec. 377, t
hestateGov ernmentmayi nanycaseof
convict
iononat r
ialhel
dbyanycour totherthanaH/ Cdi r
ectthePubl i
cProsecutortopresent
anappeal agai
nstthesentenceont hegr oundofitsinadequacyt oCourtofSessionifthe
sentenceispassedbyt heMagistrat
eort otheH/Cifthesent enceispassedbyanyot herCourt.
Whenanappeal i
sfil
edagainstthesent enceont hegroundofi tsinadequacycourtshall
not
enhancethesentenceexceptaf t
ergivingt otheaccusedar easonableopportuni
tyofsowi ng
causeagainstsuchenhancement .CaseofNadi rKhanv /sState-
1976.

4.Appeal i
ncaseofAcqui t
tal
:-Inanappeal againstacquitt
alundersec.378theH/ Chasf ul
l
powert oreviewatlar get heevidenceonwhi chtheacqui tt
alisbasedandt oreachthe
conclusi
ont hattheor derofacqui tt
alshouldber eversedashel di
ncaseofMohandasv /
sSt ate
ofMP- 1973,butexer cisinghispowert heH/ Cshoul dgiveproperweightandconsiderat
ionto
thevi
ewoft hetri
al j
udgeast ot hecredi
bil
i
tyofwi tnesses,presumptionofinnocenceinfavour
oftheaccused.Andar ightoftheaccusedt ot hebenef i
tofanydoubt .I
twasal sohel
dinSt ate
ofU.P.v/sGambi rSingh- 2005caseofappeal againstacquittali
fonsameev i
dencetwov iews
arepossible,theonei nf avourofaccusedmustbepr efer
red.

Duringtheheari
ngofappeal f
rom theorderofacqui
tt
alitshoul
dbetakenint
oconsi
derat
ion
thatther
eisnomi scarr
iageofjusti
ce,caseAll
ahr
akhaK.Mansur i
v/sStat
eofGujr
at-
2002.The
orderofacquit
talcannotbedismissedmer el
yonthegroundthatasecondappr
oachcouldhav
e

34
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

beenappl
iedi
nthecaseandi
tmeansthattheaccusedcoul
dhavebeenconvi
ctedon
consi
deri
nganot
hervi
ewacaseofChandraSinghv/sStat
eofGujr
at-
2002.

5. Appealagai
nstconv
icti
onbyH/ Cincertai
ncases:-WhereanH/Chasonappealrev
ersed
anorderofmanif
estonrecordofacquit
tal
ofanaccusedper sonandconvi
ctedhi
m and
sent
encedhimtodeathortoimprisonmentforli
feortoimpri
sonmentforater
m oft
enyearsor
more,hemayappealtothe SupremeCour tundersec.379.

6. Specialr
ightofappeali
ncert
aincases:-I
nShingaraSi
nghv /
sStateofHar
yana-
2004,when
morepersonst hanoneareconvi
ctedinonetri
alandanappealablej
udgmentoror
derhasbeen
passedi
nr espectofanyofsuchpersons,undersect
ion380.

7. Appealtocour
tofsessi
onhowhear
d:-Appeal
tot
hecour
tofsessi
onshal
lbehear
dbyt
he
sessi
onsjudgesorbyASJu/s381.

8. Pet
it
ionofappeal:
-Ever
yappeal
shal
lbemadei
nthef
orm ofapet
it
ioni
nwr
it
ingpr
esent
ed
byt
heappell
antorhispleaderu/
s382.

12.DI
FFERENCEBETWEENAPPEAL&REVI
SION

APPEAL

1. Anyper
sonconv
ict
edonat
rai
lhel
dbyH/
Cmayappeal
toS/
C.

2. Anyper
sonconv
ict
edonatri
albyaSessi
onj
udgeoronat
ri
alhel
dbyanyot
hercour
tfor
morethan7year
smayappeal
totheHi
ghCourt

3.Anyper
sonconvi
ctedonat
ri
alhel
dbymet
ropol
i
tanMagi
str
ateorMagi
str
ateI
st.Cl
assmay
appeal
toSessi
onJudge.

35
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

4.I
ftheappel
l
anti
sinj
ail
hepr
esenthi
spet
it
ionofappeal
thr
oughOf
fi
cerI
/cj
ail
.

5.Pendinganappealbyaccusedpersont
heappel
latecourtshal
lsuspendt
heexecut
ionof
orderofsent
ence&ifheisinconfi
nementhebereleasedonbail
.

REVI
SION

1. Thecor
rect
ness,
legal
i
tyorpr
opr
iet
aryofanyf
indi
ngsent
enceoror
derofanyl
owercour
t.

2. Ther
egul
ari
tyofanypr
oceedi
ngsofsuchcour
t.

3. Thepower
sofr
evi
sioncannotbeusedt
hroughi
nter
locut
oryor
der
s.

4. Duri
ngt
heheari
ngofRevi
sionar
gueoftheper
sonapply
ingforr
evi
sionshoul
dbe
consi
der
edser
iousl
yev
enthoughitt
heyar
et oobr
ief
.CasePalGeor
gev/ sst
ate-
02.

13.Whati
sbail
?Statethepr
ovisi
onsofBai
lunderCr.
P.C.Canaper
songetor
dert
ober
eleased
onBai
lwit
houtjudi
cial
orPoli
cecustody
?Refercasel
aw.

INTRODUCTION:-
Iti
st r
avestyofjusti
cethatmanypooraccusedi .
e.‘
li
tt
leIndians’ar
ef or
ced
i
ntolongcel
l
ularserv
itudeforlit
tl
eoffencesbecausethebailprocedureisbey ondtheirmeagr
e
meansandtrai
lsdon’tcommenceandev eni
ftheydo,theyneverconclude.Ourbai lsyst
em
suff
ersfr
om apropertyor
ientedapproachwhichmeanst oproceedont heer r
oneous
assumpti
onthatri
skofmonet ar
ylossistheonlydet
errentagainstfl
eei
ngf rom just
ice.

Whati sbai
l
? -
Whenanyper sonwhoi saccusedofanyoffenceothert
hannon-
bailabl
eoffence,
heshallbereleasedonbailundersec.
436ofthecodeprov i
dedhehasbeenarrestedor
detai
nedwithoutwarrantbyanOf fi
cerI
/CofPoli
cestat
ionorheappearsorisbroughtbeforea
courtandhemustbepr eparedanyti
mewhi nei
nthecustodyoratanystageoftheproceeding
beforeacourt.

Howevert
hefol
lowi
ngarethepr
ovi
sionsofget
ti
ngBai
lunderCr
.P.
C.Of
fencescanbecl
assi
fi
ed
i
ntot
woclassesonthebasi
sofbai
l
:-

36
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

i
) Bail
abl
eof
fences:–Bail
abl
eof f
encesar
eofgeneralnatur
eandintheseof f
encesi
tis
r
ightofaccusedt
obereleasedonbai
l.Sec.
436ofCr.
P.C.per
tainstoBai
l
ableoffences.

i
i) i
i
)Non- Bail
abl
eoffences:
–Theseoffencesar
eofsev
erenatur
eandbailcannotbe
claimedasr i
ghtinthem.Insuchcasesbai
ldependsupont
hediscr
eti
onofthecourt
.Sec.437
relatest
oNon- bail
ableof
fences.

1. GrantofBailinNon-bail
ableoffences:–Sec.437pr ovi
desthatwhenanyper sonaccusedof
orsuspectedofcommi ssionofanynonbai l
ableoffenceisarrestedordet
ainedwi t
houtwarrant
byanOf f
icerI/
CofaPol icestati
onorappear sori sbroughtbeforeacourtothert hant heHi
gh
CourtorcourtofSessi
onhemayber el
easedonbai l.Thussection437empower eda
Magistr
atetotakebaili
nnonbai lableoffences.Thepr ovi
sionofthismakesitcleart hatbai
li
n
nonbail
ableoffencesdependsupont hediscreti
onoft hecourt.

i
) Whenbai lshall
begranted:–sec.437(1)laysdownt wosituati
oninwhichbailshal
l
notbegrant
edbymagi str
ate:
1)reasonablegr
oundsf orbeli
evi
ngthathehasbeengui lt
yof
off
encepunishablewithdeathorimprisonmentf
orlife.2.Whenoffencei scogni
zabl
eandhe
hadbeenconv i
ctedwithdeath,i
mpr i
sonmentforli
feori mpri
sonmentf or7yearsormoreorhe
hasbeenconv i
ctedont woormor eoccasion.

i
i) Ther
eareexcepti
onstorecei
vebai
l:
-thi
ssect
ional
sopr
ovi
dedwi
thf
ewexcept
ions
wher
emagi
str
atecanrecei
vebail
infol
lowi
ngcases:
-

a)Wher
etheaccusedi
sundert
heageof16y
ear
s.

b)I
fshei
sawoman.

c)Si
ckori
nfi
rm

Thusintheabovecasest
hebai
lappl
i
cat
ioncanbeacceptedevent
houghtheaccusedingui
lt
y
ofoff
encepunishabl
ewit
hdeat
horimpr
isonmentf
orli
feorhasbeenconv
ictedearl
i
er.Case

37
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Venkat
aramanappav
/sSt
ateofKar
nat
ka-
1992.

Condit
ionsforBail
:-Undersec.437(3)thatwher
eaper sonaccusedorsuspectedofthe
commi ssi
onofanof fencepunishablewithi
mprisonmentwhichmayext endto7y ear
sormor e
orforanoffence,
abet mentoforconspi r
acyorattempttocommi tanysuchoffenceisr
eleased
onbail,t
hecourtmayi mposeanycondi ti
onwhicht hecour
tconsi
dersnecessary,asi
nthecase
ofGurbakshSinghv /sStat
eofPunj ab-
1980:-

·Inordert
oensurethatsuchper
sonshal
lat
tendi
naccor
dancewi
tht
hecondi
ti
onsoft
hebond
executedundert
hischapter
.

·Thatsuchper
sonshal
lnotcommi
tanof
fencesi
mil
art
oanof
fenceofwhi
chhei
saccusedor
suspect
ed.

·Thatot
her
wisei
nthei
nter
estofJust
ice.

Canaper
songetor
dert
ober
eleasedonBai
lwi
thoutj
udi
cial
orPol
i
cecust
ody
:-

Whereanypersonhasr easont obel

ievethathemaybear r
est
edonaccusati
onofhavi
ng
commi t
tedanon-bai
lableoffencehemayappl ytot
heHi ghCour
tortheCour
tofSessi
onfora
di
rect
ionundersec.438t hatintheeventofsuchar
restheshal
lberel
easedonbai
l.

*I
twashel dinAdriDharam dassv/sStateofW. B-2005;
itwasheldthati
tisexerci
sedincaseof
ananti
cipatedaccusati
onofnon-bail
ableoffence.Theobjectoft
hissecti
onisthatthemoment
apersonisarrest
edifhehasal r
eadyobtainedanor derfr
om HighcourtofCourtofSessi
onhe
shal
lbereleasedimmedi at
elyonbail
wi t
houtbeingsentt oj
ail
.

*I
twasalsoheldinVamanNarainGhiy
av/sSt
ateofRaj
ast
han-
2009,dir
ecti
onu/
s438thatt
he
appl
i
cantshallberel
easedonbai
lwhenev
erar
rest
edforwhi
cheverof
fencewhat
soev
ersucha
bl
anketordershoul
dnotbepassed.

Itwasf
urt
herobserv
edt
hatdi
rect
ionundersec.
438i
stobei
ssuedatpr
e-ar
restst
age,
wit
h
somecondit
ions:
-

i
)Thatt hepersonshall
makehimselfavail
abl
eforint
err
ogati
onbyaPoliceoff
icerasandwhen
requi
red.ii
)Thepersonshall
notdir
ectl
yorindir
ect
lymakeanyinducement,t
hreatorpromi
set
o
anypersonacquaintedwit
hthefact
soft hecase.i
i
i)Thatt
hepersonshall
notleaveIndi
a

38
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

wi
thoutt
hepr evi
ouspermi
ssionofthecourt
.iv
)Ifsuchpersonisther
eaf
terarr
estedwithout
warr
antbyPoliceonsuchaccusat
ionandispreparedei
therattheti
meofarrestoratanytime
whi
leinthecustodyofpol
i
cestati
ontogivebail
,heshal
l berel
easedonbail
.

14:
-Di
scusst
heprov
isi
onsr
elat
ingt
orev
isi
ont
ocr
imi
nal
cases.CanHi
ghCour
texer
cisi
ng
rev
isi
onpowers?

INTRODUCTI ON:–Revisioni salsoaj udi

cialr
emedywhi chhasbeenment ionedinsec.397of
thecode.Themai nobjectofr evisionistoexaminethepurit
y,vali
dit
y,rel
evancyorr egul
ati
onor
anyorder,fi
ndingorsent ence.Thi ssecti
ongivespower st
oHi ghCour tandtheSessi onJudge
tocall
f orandexaminet her ecordofanypr oceedingbefor
eanyi nf
eriorCri
mi nalCourtwit
hini
ts
orhislocaljuri
sdi
cti
on.Thef ol
lowingsaret heprovi
sionsr
egardingwhent her ev
isi
onshal l
be
done:-

1.Callingf orr ecordstoexer cisepowersofrevisi

on:–TheHi ghcour tortheSessi onJudgemay
cal
l f
orandexami nether ecor
dofanypr oceedi
ngbef oreanyinf
eriorcri
mi nalcourtofhis
j
urisdictionf ort hepurposeofsat i
sfy
ingastothecor r
ectness,l
egalit
yorpr opri
etyofany
fi
nding, sent enceoror derrecordedorpassed,u/s397oft hecode.CaseJohar&Ot hersv/s
Mangal Pr asadandanot her-
2008,itwasheldthattr
ialcourti
snotf oundtobepassedwi thout
consider ingr elevantev i
denceorbyconsi der
ingir
rel
ev antevi
dence.

I
nacaseofBadriLalv/
sStateofM.P.
-1989:Thepowersundert
hissect
ionar
eundoubt
edly
wi
deandtheSessionJudgecantakeupthemat t
ersuomotu,i
tmustbeseenthatt
hecri
minal
l
awisnotusedasaninstr
umentofpri
vatevengeance.

KuldeepSinghv/
sStat
eofM.P.-
1989:
Itwashel
dthatt
heor
derf
rami
ngchar
gecoul
dnotbe
l
ightl
yint
erfer
edwit
hinrev
isi
on.

I
nv i
nodkumarv/
sMohawat
i-
1990:
ThatthecourtofSessi
onhassimi
larpowersasofHigh
Courti
nrev
isi
onandast
heHi
ghCourti
sauthori
zedtotakeaddi
ti
onal
ev i
denceinr
evi
sion.

InGram SabhaLakhanpurv
/sRam Dev-
1993:-I
twashel dthatt
hecompl
ainantmayormaynot
havealegalri
ghtofbei
ngheardbutt
herul
eofpr udenceandnatur
alj
ust
icerequi
rest
hatt
he
aggri
evedpartymustbeaff
ordedanoppor
tunit
yofhearing.

39
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

InacaseofMahavirsi
nghv/sEmperor-
1944:Ther
egul
ari
tyofanypr
oceedingsofsuchinf
eri
or
courtwheret
hef
indingsent
enceororderi
sil
l
egalori
mproperandwher
et heproceedi
ngsare
i
rregul
ar.

CaseofT.B.
Hari
parsadv/sStat
e-1977,i
twasheldthatt
hepowersofrev
isi
oncannotbeused
thr
oughint
erl
ocut
oryorderspassedinanyappeali
nquir
y,t
ri
alorot
herpr
oceedi
ngsundersec.
397(2)
.

I
nacaseofPaulGeorgev/sStat
e-2002,
itwashel
dthatduri
ngtheheari
ngofRevi
sionargue
t
heper
sonapply
ingforrev
isi
onshouldbeconsi
deredseri
ousl
yeventhoughi
ftheyaretoobri
ef.

2. Or derofInqui
ry:
-Sec.398ofthecodeprovidespower sofi ssui
ngorderofinqui
rytoHigh
Courtorcour
tofSession.Accor
dinglyonexamininganyr ecordundersec.397orotherwisethe
HighCourtorSessionJudgemaydi r
ectCJM byhi mselforbyanyofMagi strat
esubordinateto
hi
mt omakei nquir
yofanycomplaintwhichhasbeendi smi ssedundersec.203orthecaseof
anypersonaccusedofanof f
encewhohasbeendi scharged.

3.Power
sofRevi
sionofCourtofSessi
on:–Sec.399pr
ovi
despowersofrevi
siont
ocourtof
sessi
oni
nthecaseofanyproceedi
ngtherecor
dofwhichhasbeencal
ledforbyhimsel
f.The
sessi
onj
udgemayexerci
sealloranyofthepowerswhi
chmayheexercisedbytheHighCourt
.

Whereanapplicati
onforrevi
sioni
smadebyoronbehal fofanyper sonbef or
ethesession
j
udgethedecisionofthesessionjudgeshal
lbefinalandnof urtherproceedi
ngsbywayof
rev
isi
onatheinstanceofsuchper sonshal
lbeentert
ainedbyt heHi ghCourtoranyothercour
t.
Thesepowersofr evi
sionhavebeenprovi
dedtotheAddl .SessionJudgeundersec.400.

4.Power sofRevisionofHighCour t:–Sec.

401oft hecodeprov i
despowersofr evi
siontoHi gh
Courtthatincaseofanypr oceedingtherecordofwhichhasbeencal l
edbyi t
selforwhich
other
wi secomest oitsknowledge,theHighCourtmayexer ci
seanyoft hepower sconferr
edon
acour tofappealbysec.386,389, 390and391oroncour tofsessionbysec.307.Thusdur ing
revi
sionHighCour tshal
lbeabletoexer ci
seallpowerswhichanappellatecourtcando.Incase
ofVimal Singhv/
sKhumanSi ngh-1998:SupremeCour tr
estri
ctedtheareaofrev i
siongenerall
y

40
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

theor
derofacqui
ttal
isnoti
nter
fered.Power
sofrev
isioncanbeexer
cisedi
nfol
l
owi
ng
sit
uat
ions:
-i
)Wher
esev er
eil
l
egal
ityhasoccur
redbytr
ialcour
t.

i
i
)Wher
etheor
deroft
ri
alcour
thasf
ail
edt
opr
ovi
dej
ust
ice.

i
i
i)Wher
ethet
ri
alcour
thast
ri
edacasewhi
chf
all
bey
ondi
tsj
uri
sdi
cti
on.

i
v)Wher
ethet
ri
alcour
thasst
oppedt
aki
ngev
idenceunl
awf
ull
y.

Hereitisperti
nenttomentionthatanypar t
yhasappliedforrevi
sionbel
ievingthatnoappeal
l
iestherebutanappeal l
i
est herethenthecourtshal
lconsidersuchapplicati
onforappeali
nthe
i
nterestofjust
iceu/s401(2).Theorderofacquitt
alcannotber ev
ersedintoanor derof
convict
ioninrevi
sionasheldincaseofSi ngherSi
nghv /sStateofHaryana-2004,u/s401(
3).

5.PowerofHighCourttowithdrawortr
ansferrevi
sioncases:-wheneveroneormor epersons
convi
ctedatt
hesamet ri
almakesanappl i
cati
ont oHighCour tforrevi
sion.TheHighCourtshal
l
di
rectt
hattheappl
icat
ionsforrevi
sionmadet oitbetransfer
redtot heSessionJudgewhowi l
l
dealwi
ththesameasi fi
twer eanappli
cat
ionmadebef orehim,undersec.402oft hi
scode.

6.Copyoft heordertobesendt ol owercourt:

-Sec.405ofthecodeprovidest hatwher eany
casei srev
isedbyHi ghCourtorcour tofsession,i
torheshalli
nthemannerpr ovidedby
sec.388,cert
ifyit
sdecisi
onoror dertot hecourtofbywhichthefi
ndi
ng, sentenceoror der
revi
sedwasr ecordedorpassedandt hecourttowhichdeci
sionororderissocer tif
iedshal
l
thereuponmakesuchor der
sasar econf i
rmabletothedeci
sionsocerti
fiedandi fnecessar
y
recordshallbeamendedi naccor dancet her
ewi t
h.

15.
Discusst
hepr
ovi
sionsofJudgment
.Cancour
tal
teri
tsownJudgment
?

I
NTRODUCTI ON: –Itmustcontainthejudgmentcomesoutf r
om everytr
iali
nanycr i
minalcour
t
ofit
sorigi
naljuri
sdict
ionwhichistobepr onouncedi nopencour tbythepresi
dingoffi
cer
i
mmedi atel
yaf t
ertheterminat
ionofthet ri
al.Judgmentcanbedel iver
edinwhol eorthe
operat
ivepartofthejudgmentandex plaini
ngt hesubstanceofthejudgmentinal anguage
whichisunderstoodbyt heaccused.Thepr ovisi
onshowev erareasunder:-

41
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

1. ContentsofJudgement :-Section353ofcr.
P.C-1973pr ovi
desthatthejudgementinevery
tri
ali
nanycriminalshallbepronouncedintheopencour tbythepresi
dingoffi
cerj
ustaft
erthe
complet
ionoft hetr
ailoratsomesubsequentt i
mewhi chnoticeshall
begi ventot
hepar t
iesor
thei
radvocates.I
tcanbedel iveredasawholeoft hejudgementorcanbyr eadi
ngouttheof
j
udgement .Ifmayalsobeby r
eadingtheoperat
ivepar tofthejudgementinsuchlanguage
whicheasil
ybeunder stoodbyt heaccusedorhisadv ocate.

a)Eachandeverypageofjudgmentwheni
tismadeshoul
dbesi
nged,
ment
ioni
ngt
hedat
eof
deli
veryoft
hejudgmentinopencourt
.

b)Noj udgmentwhichi
sdeli
veredbyanycri
minal
courtshal
lbedeemedtobeinval
i
dbyreason
onlyoftheabsenceofanypart
yorhisadvocat
eonthedayorplacenot
if
iedf
orthedel
i
veryof
thejudgment.

c)Assoonasthej
udgmenti
spronouncedacopyoft
hesamei
mmedi
atel
ybemadeav
ail
abl
e
fort
heperusal
oft
hepar
ti
esfreeofcost.

d)
Iftheaccusedi
sinthecustodyheshall
bebr oughtupt
ohearthej
udgmentpr
onounced.And
i
ftheaccusedisnoti
ncustodyheshallberequir
edbythecour
ttoat
tendt
ohearthejudgement
pr
onounced.

e)Wheretherearemoreaccusedthanoneandoneormor eofthem donotat

tendt
hecourton
dateonwhichthejudgementi
spronounced.Pr
esidi
ngoff
icert
oavoiddelayi
nthedi
sposalof
thecasepronouncethej
udgementeventhei
rabsence.

2.Language&cont entsofJudgement:–Accordingtosec.354thejudgementshoul
dbewr it
ten
i
nl anguageofcourtwhi chcontai
nspoint
sfordeter
minati
on, t
hedecisi
onther
eonandt he
reasonsf ort
hedecision.I
fitbeajudgementofacquit
tal
,shallstat
etheof
fenceofwhich
accusedi sacqui
tt
al anddir
ectthathebesetatli
bert
y.Sec.354(3)whenal
lthemurder
er sar
et o
besent encedwit
hdeat hsentencewil
lbecomeadeadl awashel dinacaseofMuniappanv /s
StateofTami Nadu-1981.

42
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

3Orderf ornot
if
yingaddr essofpr evi
ousl
yconv i
ctedoffender:–Whenanyper sonhavingbeen
convi
ctedbyacour tinIndiaofanof f
encepunishablewhichr el
atestocri
mi nal i
nti
midati
onwi t
h
i
mprisonmentf orat erm ofthreeyearsorupwardsisagai nconvict
edofanyof fencepunishabl
e
Courtmayor derthathisr esi
denceandanychangeofsuchr esi
denceaf t
erreleasebenot if
ied.
Suchrulesmaypr ov i
def orpunishmentforthebreachthereof,undersec.356.

4.Ordertopaycompensat ion:
–Whenacour timposesasent enceoff i
neorasentence
i
ncludingsent enceofdeat hofwhichfineformsapar tthecourtmayatt heti
meofpassi ng
j
udgementt hewhol eoranypar toffi
nerecov eredt obeappl i
ed.Inthepay menttoanypersonof
compensat ionforanyl ossorinj
urycausedbyt heof fencewhencompensat i
onisintheopini
on
ofthecour trecoverablebysuchpersoninaci v
il court.Attheti
meofawar di
ngcompensat i
onin
anycivilsui
tr el
ati
ngt othesamemat terthecour tshalltakeint
oaccountanysum pai dor
recoveredasscompensat ionontheprov i
sionsl aiddowni nt
hissec.357,i
ncaseofMangi l
alv/s
StateofMP- 2004.InSubesi nghv /
sSt at
eofHar yana-2006,i
saf i
tcaset oawardcompensation.

5.SpecialReasonstoberecordedincertai
ncases:-Asperprov i
sionslaiddowni nsec.361of
cr.
P.C.,
whereinanycaset hecourtcouldhavedealwithanaccusedper sonundersec.360under
theprovisi
onsofprobati
onofof f
endersActoray oungoffenderunderchi l
drenactoranyot her
l
awf orthetimebeinginforceforthetr
eatment,t
raini
ngorrehabilit
ati
onofy oungoffendershas
notdoneso.I tmustberecordedinjudgementgivi
ngspecialreasonsforhav ingnotdoneso, as
heldinacaseofSt at
eofHi machal Pr
edeshv/sLatSingh-
1990.

6.Courtnottoalt
erjudgement:
-Pr
ovi
sionsl
aysinthesec.362orbyanyotherlawf
ort het
ime
beinginfor
ce,nocour twheni
thassi
gnedthejudgementorfi
nalor
derdi
sposingofacaseshall
al
terorrevi
ewt hesameexcepttocor
rectcl
eri
calorar
it
hmet i
cal
err
or.I
ncaseofNar esh&
othersv/
sSt at
eofU. P.-
1981.

7.Copyoft heJudgementtobegi ventotheaccused&ot herper

sons:-Whentheaccusedis
sentencedt oimprisonmentacopyoft hejudgementshalli
mmedi at
elyaft
erthepronouncement
ofthej udgementbegi vent
ohi mfreeofcost.IncaseofLadliPr
asadZutshi v
/sSt at
eof
All
ahbad- 1931,itwasheldthatev
enpubl i
chasar ightt
oobtainacopyoft hejudgementofany
cri
mi nalcourt.Thi
shasbeenpr ovi
dedinsec.363ofCr .P.
C.-
1973.

8.Judgementwhent
obet
ransl
ated:–Asperi
nst
ruct
ionsu/s364iti
ssaidthattheori
ginal
j
udgementshall
befi
l
edwi
ththerecordoft
hepr
oceedingsandwheretheor
iginali
srecordedi
n

43
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

alanguagedif
fer
entf
rom t
hatofthecour
tandtheaccusedsor
equi
resat
ransl
ati
ont
her
eof
i
ntothelanguageoft
hecourtshal
lbeaddedt
osuchr ecor
d.

9.CourtofSessi
ontosendcopyoff i
ndingandsentencetoDist
ri
ctMagistr
ate:-Thecasestr
ied
bythecourtofSessi
onoraCJM thecour torsuchMagistr
ateshal
lforwar
dacopyofi tsorhis
fi
ndingandsentencei
fanytotheDistr
ictMagistr
atewit
hinwhoselocalj
uri
sdicti
onthetri
alwas
hel
daspr ovi
dedinsec.365ofCr.
P.C.-
1973.

16:
Analysethepr
ovi
sionsofgr
antofAnt
ici
pat
orybai
l
.Canant
ici
pat
orybai
lbeal
l
owedi
n
Murdercase?I
fsowhen?

I
NTRODUCTION:
–Ant i
cipat
orybail
hasani mport
antplacei
ntheseri
esofBai
l
.It
smainobject
i
stoprot
ectt
hei
nnocentpersonsfr
om arr
estundersec.438ofthecr
imi
nalpr
ocedur
ecode-
1973l
aysdownt
heprovi
sionsregardi
nggrantofant
ici
pator
ybail
.

· Whati sAntici
patoryBail
:–In-spi
teofthefactthattheCr.P.C.,
hasnotdefinedAntici
pator
y
Bailbuti
tmeanst hatwhenaper sonhasar easont obeli
evethathemaybear rest
edon
accusati
onofhav ingcommi t
tedanon-bail
ableoffence,hemayappl yt
oHi ghCour tortothe
courtofSessi
ont hatintheeventofsucharrestheshallbereleasedonbailatthatti
mei ti
s
anti
cipat
orybail
.Itisalsocal
ledApprehensi
onBai lonthebasisofprovi
sionslaiddowni nsec.
438ofcr.P.C.

· Obj ectoftheAntici
patoryBail
:
-Theobj ectofAntici
pat
orybaili
stoprot
ectaper sonfr
om
arr
est.Apersonagai nstwhom awar rantofarresthasbeenissuedshal
lfi
rstbearrest
edkepti
n
custodyforfewday sandt henrel
easedonbai l
, i
tmeanswher ether
eisnopur posefort
he
arr
estheshal lnotbearrested.

· Whenant icipat
oryBailwoul dbeAccept ed:-Sect
ion438(1)sayst hat
,“whenanyper sonhas
reasont obel
iev et
hathemaybear rest
edonanaccusat i
onofhav ingcommi tt
edanon- bailabl
e
offence,hemayappl ytotheHighCour torcour tofSessi
onf oradirecti
onunderthissec.438(1)
andcour tift
hinksitfit
,candirectthati
nev entofsuchar r
estheshal lberel
easedonbai l.
”Case
ofGur bakshSinghv /sStateofPunj ab-
1980, hewasnotgr antedantici
pator
ybailmerelyonf ear
ofarrest.I
nasi milarcaseofAshokkumarv /sStateofRajasthan-
1980, t
hatanti
cipat
orybai l
shouldnotaccept edunt i
lther
ei sadefini
tefearofar r
estandsuchf acthascomebef oret he
court.

44
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

I
tispert
inenttomentionherethatr
easont
obeliev
edoesnotmeanmerefear
,i.
e.mer
e‘fear
’is
notsuf
fi
cientcause.Groundsonwhichbel
iefi
sbasedmustbecapabl
eofbei
ngexamined.

· WhoshallaccepttheAnt
ici
patoryBai
l
:-Sec.438(
1)t
hatt
hef
oll
owi
ngaut
hor
it
iesmay
acceptt
heant
ici
patorbai
lappl
icati
on:

i
. Hi
ghCour
t i
i
.Cour
tofSessi
on

Thatanyaccusedofanof
fenceandincust
odybereleasedonbai
lonaccept
anceofbai
l
appl
icat
ioni
nt heabov
esai
dcourtsu/s439ofCr
.P.C.

· Condi ti
onsofGr antAnti
cipator
yBail:
-Cour
tcanimposereasonablecondi
ti
onsforgrantof
ant
icipatorybai
l.Thoseconditi
onshav ebeenmentionedi
nsecti
on438( 2)
.Whent heHigh
CourtorCour tofSessionmakeadi recti
onwithsomecondit
ionsintheli
ghtofthefact
softhe
par
ticularcaseasitmayt hi
nkf i
tforbail
:-

a.Thatt
heper
sonshal
lnotl
eav
eIndi
awi
thoutpr
evi
ousper
missi
onoft
hecour
t.

b.Thatpersondi
rectl
yorindi
rect
lymakeani
nducementthreatorpr
omisetoanyperson
acquaint
edwiththefact
softhecasesoastodissuadehi
mf rom di
scl
osi
ngsuchfactstot
he
courtortoanypoli
ceOffi
cer.

c.Thattheper
sonshal
lmakehi
msel
fav
ail
abl
efori
nter
rogat
ionbyapol
i
ceof
fi
cerasandwhen
requi
red.

d.Thatanysuchot
hercondi
ti
onasmaybei
mposedundersec.
437i
fthebai
li
sgr
ant
edunder
thi
ssecti
on.

45
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

ANTICIPATORYBAI LINMURDERCASE: –Thereisnosetpr

incipl
efi
xedf orgr
antof
anti
ci
patorybail
.Iti
sbasicall
ydependsuponthefact
sandcircumstancesofeverycaseandthe
natur
eofthecase.Generallytheant
ici
pator
ybail
isnottobegrantedinthemat t
ersl
ikemurder
,
unnatur
aldeath,dourl
ydeath.

AcaseifSamunder Si
nghv/
sStat
eofRaj asthan-
1987,t
hecour
theldthatt
heant
ici
pat
orybai
l
cannotbeacceptedindowr
ydeathcasesespecial
lywher
efat
her-
in-
lawandmother
-i
n-l
aw
causedunnatur
aldeathoft
hedaughter
-i
n-law.

Si
milarl
yref
usi
ngt
ograntofant
ici
pat
orybail
int
hemattersofat
roci
ti
estoschedul
etri
beand
schedulecast
ewashel
dtobeconsti
tut
ional
inacaseofStat
ev/sRam ki
shoreBatol
i
a-1995.

Anti
ci
pator
ybai
lhasal
sobeenrefusedinthemat
ter
sofFERA,
acaseofDukhi
shy
am
Venupanni
v/sAr
unKumarBajori
a-1998.

Eventhef
actsment
ionedabovetheant
ici
pat
orybai
lcanbegr
ant
edi
nMur
dercasesont
he
basi
soffol
lowi
ngci
rcumstances:
-

i
)Whent
her
eisnoappr
ehensi
onaboutt
heabscondi
ngoft
heaccused.

i
i
)Whent
her
eisnoappr
ehensi
onofi
nduci
ngorent
ici
ngwi
tnessesbyt
heaccused.

i
i
i)Whent
her
eisnoappr
ehensi
onoft
heaccusedf
ormov
ingabr
oad.

i
v)Wher
etheof
fencei
snott
hesev
ereordeadl
ynat
ure.

HEARI
NGOFPROSECUTI
ON

Theprosecut
ionmustbeprovi
dedanopportuni
tyofheari
ngwhi
leconsider
ingt
heant
ici
pat
ory
bai
lasheldinthecaseofSt
ateofAssam v
/sR.K.Kri
shankumar
-1998.

46
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

UNI
T-V

I
NTRODUCTI
ON:
-Of
fencescanbecl
assi
fi
edi
ntot
wocl
assesont
hebasi
sofbai
l
:

Bail
ableof
fences:–Bail
abl
eoffencesar
eofgener
alnatur
eandintheseoff
encesi
tisr
ightof
accusedtobereleasedonbai
l
.Sec.436ofCr
.P.
C.pert
ainstoBai
l
ableoff
ences.

Non-Bai
labl
eoff
ences:–Theseoffencesareofsev
er enatur
eandbail
cannotbeclai
medas
r
ightint
hem.Insuchcasesbaildependsuponthediscret
ionoft
hecourt
.Sec.437rel
atest
o
Non-bai
l
ableof
fences,
undersecti
on437and439r elatestonon-
bai
lmentoff
ence.

GrantofBaili
nNon-bailabl
eoffences:–Sec.437pr ovi
desthatwhenanypersonaccusedofor
suspectedofcommi ssionofanynonbailabl
eoffenceisarrest
edordetai
nedwithoutwarr
antby
anOfficerI
/CofaPol i
cestati
onorappear sori
sbr oughtbefor
eacourtothert
hantheHigh
CourtorcourtofSessionhemayber el
easedonbai l
.

Thussect
ion437empoweredaMagi
str
atetot
akebail
innonbail
abl
eoffences.Thepr
ovisi
on
ofthi
smakesitcl
eart
hatbai
li
nnonbai
labl
eoff
encesdependsuponthediscr
eti
onofthecour
t.

Whenbailshal
lbeGrant
ed:
-Sec.437(
1)ofthecodel
aysdownt
hef
oll
owi
ngsi
tuat
ionsi
nwhi
ch
bai
lshal
lnotbegrant
edbytheMagist
rat
e:-

i
) Whent
heMagi
str
atebel
i
evest
hatt
her
ear
ereasonabl
egr
oundsofgui
l
tyofof
fence
puni
shabl
e.

i
i
) I
fper
sonhasbeenpr
evi
ousl
yconv
ict
edofanof
fencepuni
shabl
eont
woormor
e
t
imes.

CONDI
IONSFORBAI
L

47
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

1Sec.437(3)oft
hecodeprovi
dest hatwhereaper sonaccusedorsuspect
edofthe
commissionofanoff
encepunishablewhi chmayext endtosevenyearormoreorofan
off
encedef i
nedi
nIPCandanysuchof f
encet heaccusedisrel
easedonbailt
hecourthowev
er
mayimposeanyconditi
onwhichthecour tconsider
snecessary
:-

1. Thatsuchper
sonshal
lat
tendi
naccor
dancewi
thcondi
ti
onsment
ionedi
nthebond
execut
edbyhim.

2. Suchpersonshal
lnotcommi
tanof
fenceoft
hesi
mil
art
oanof
fenceofwhi
chhei
s
accusedori
ssuspect
ed.

ARRESTOFAPERSON

I
ntr
oduction:–Gener al
l
y ,
apersonisarrestedbytheorderofthemagist
rateorbyawarr
ant.A
pol
iceoffi
cercannotarrestapersonarbit
rari
lyorwit
houttheorderofmagist
rat
eorwit
hout
warrant
.Butthi
srulehasf ewexcepti
onst oitwhichmeansthatundercert
ainci
rcumst
ancesa
per
soncanbear r
estedwi t
houtt
heor derofthemagistr
ateorwithoutwarr
ant.

Ar
restwi t
houtwar
rant
:-Sec.41oftheCr
imi
nal
ProcedureCode1973provi
dest
hatapol
i
ce
of
ficercanarr
estaper
sonwi thoutt
heor
der
sorwarrantoft
hemagist
ratei
nfol
lowi
ng
si
tuati
ons:

(8) Whenanyper sonhasbeenconcer

nedinanycogni
zabl
eoffenceoragai
nstwhom a
reasonabl
ecomplainthasbeenmadeorcredi
bleinf
ormat
ionhasbeenrecei
vedorareasonabl
e
suspici
onexi
sts.Ofhishavi
ngbeensoconcerned.

(9) Whenanyper
sonhasi
nhi
spossessi
onwi
thoutl
awf
ulexcuseanyi
mpl
ementofhouse-
breaki
ng.

(10) Whenanyper soninwhosepossessi

onanythi
ngisfoundwhichmayreasonabl
ybe
suspectedtobestol
enproper
tyandwhomayr easonabl
ybesuspectedofhav
ingcommit
tedan
offencewit
hrefer
encetosuchthi
ngs.

48
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

(11) Whenanypersonobstruct
sapoliceoffi
cerwhil
eint
heexecut
ionofhi
sdut
y,orwhohas
escaped,
orat
tempt
st oescapefrom l
awfulcustody
.

(
12) Whenanypersoni
sreasonabl
ysuspect
edofbei
ngadeser
terf
rom anyoft
hear
med
f
orcesoft
heuni
on.

(
13) Whenanyper sonbei
ngar
eleasedconv
ict
,commi
tsabr
eachofanyr
ulemadeundersub
-
sect
ion(
5)ofsect
ion356;

(
14) Whenf oranypersonsarr
estanyrequi
sit
ion,whet
herwri
tt
enororal,hasbeenr
eceived
f
rom anot
herpol
iceof
fi
cer,pr
ovidedthatt
herequisi
ti
onspeci
fi
csthepersontobearr
ested.

Thus,inthi
swayapoli
ceof
fi
cerundersec41(
1)canar
restanyper
sonwi
thoutt
heor
deror
warrantofamagi
str
ate.

CHARGE

INTRODUCTI ON: –Theobj ectoft

heruleembodi edinthesec.218ofCr .P.C.,i
st oensurea
fai
rtri
al andtoseet hattheaccusedisnotbewilderedorper pl
extoconf usebyhav i
ngbeen
askedt odefendsev eral
unconnectedchargesordi sti
nctoffenceslumpedt ogetheri
none
chargeori nseparatechar ges.Wewil
lreadtherulesrelat
ingtojoinderofchargesdescribedi
n
dif
ferentpartofthissection.Ther
eisnoexceptiont otherulethatthereshouldbeseparate
chargeforeachof fence.Thedet ai
lstudyofthi
ssect i
onisasunder :
-

DEFINITION: –Forev er
ydist
inctoffenceofwhichanypersoni
saccusedthereshal
lbea
separatechargeandev erychargeshal l
betr
iedseparat
ely.Wher
etheaccusedpersonbyan
appli
cationinwri
ting,sodesir
esandt heMagist
rat
eisofopini
onthatsuchpersoni
snotl
ikel
y
tobepr ejudi
cedthereby,Magistr
atemayt r
ytogetheral
loranynumberofthechargesf
amed
againstsuchperson.

1. Ef
fectofCont
rav
ent
ionofSec.
218:
-Theef
fectoft
hecont
rav
ent
ionoft
hepr
ovi
sionsoft
his

49
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

sec.hasbeenconsi der
edbyt heSupr emeCour tinfol
lowingnumberofcases: -SushilKumarv /s
JoyShankar -1971:Itwasheldt hatchargesunder408and477AofI PCcoul dbet ri
edt ogether.
Inthi
scasesev eralper
sonsaccusedonsev er
al it
emsofembezzl ementwer et r
iedjointly.Ther
e
wasnof ailureofjusti
ceinconsequenceoft hej oi
nderofchargeshadoccur red.InV.N.
KAMDARv /sDELHIMUNI CI
PALI TY-1973:Itwashel d,“t
hattheprovisi
onsofsec.218t o224
wouldindicatethatseparatechar geandsepar atetri
alforsuchdisti
nctoff
encei sthenor mal
rul
eandj ointtri
alisanexceptionwhent heaccusedhav ecommi ttedseparateoffence. ”

2. FailuretoExplaininjur
iesont heaccused:
-Whentheprosecut
ionfail
stoexplain
sati
sfactori
lytheinjur
iessustainedbytheaccusedtherear
enumberofj udi
cial
pronouncement sont hispoint
.CaseSt ateofGuj
ratv/sBaiFat
ima-1975:I
twashel dthatt
he
accusedhadi nfli
ctedtheinjur
iesont hemember softhepr
osecut
ionpartyinexerci
seofthe
ri
ghtofsel f
-defence.

3. Threeof fencesofthesameki ndwithinyearmaybechar gedtoget her:

-undersecti
on219of
Cr.P.C.whenaper sonisaccusedofmor eoffencesthanoneoft hesameki ndcommi tted
withi
nthespaceoft welvemont hsfrom thefir
sttothel astofsuchof fences, hemaybechar ged
withandtriedatonet ri
alforanynumberoft hem notexceedi ngthree.Pr ovi
sionsofsectionare
onlyenabli
ngpr ovi
sions,i
tapplieswher eoffencesareoft hesameki ndbuti tdoesnotappl y
whereof f
encesar enotoft hesameki ndsuchascr i
mi nalbreachoft rustandf al
sif
icat
ionof
accounts.Rahmatv /sStateofU.P. -1980.

Tri
alfort
hanoneoffence:
-Ifi
noneseriesofActssoconnect
edt
ogetherast
ofor
mthesame
tr
ansacti
onmoreoffencesthanonearecommi t
tedbythesameper
son,hemaybechar
ged
wit
handt ri
edatonetri
alf
oreverysuch

APPEALS&I
TSLI
MITATI
ONPERI
OD

INTRODUCTI ON:
-Appealisanimpor t
antremedyforperson’sdi ssati
sfi
edf rom judgmentf inding
andordersofthetri
alcourt
.Undersection372oftheCr .P.
C. ,
itisprovidedt hatrelat
ionto
appealiti
snecessarytoknowt hatnoappealshall
liefrom anyj udgmentoror derofacr iminal
courtexceptasprovi
dedbyt hi
scodeoranyot herlawfort i
mebei nginforce, caseGar i
kapati
v/sSubhashcoudhari-
1957.Howev ertheprov
isi
onsr egardingmaki nganappeal arethe
fol
lowing:
-

50
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

1.Appealfr
om or
dersrequir
ingsecur
it
yorrefusal
toacceptorrejecti
ngsuretyf
orkeeping
peaceorgoodbehavior
:–Anyper sonwhohasbeenor der
edt ogiv esecur
it
yforkeepi
ngthe
peaceorforgoodbehavi
ororwhoi saggr
ievedbyanyorderrefusingtoacceptorrej
ect
inga
suret
yonthebasisofsec.373.

2.Appealsfrom Convi
ctions:–Accordingtosecti
on374ofcodet hatanypersonconvi
ctedona
tr
ial
byaH/ Cinitsext
raordinar
yorigi
nalcri
minalj
urisdi
ctionmayappealtoSupr
emeCour t
si
milaranypersonconv i
ctedbysessionjudgeoronat ri
alhel
dbyanyothercourtwhi
ch
sent
enceori mprisonmentismor ethan7y earsmayappeal toHi
ghcourt.CasePanchiv
/s
Stat
eofU. P.
-1998,InC.Gopinathanv/sStateofKerala-
1991

3.AppealbyStateagainstsentence:–Undersec. 377, t
hestateGov ernmentmayi nanycaseof
convict
iononat r
ialhel
dbyanycour totherthanaH/ Cdi r
ectthePubl i
cProsecutortopresent
anappeal agai
nstthesentenceont hegr oundofitsinadequacyt oCourtofSessionifthe
sentenceispassedbyt heMagistrat
eort otheH/Cifthesent enceispassedbyanyot herCourt.
Whenanappeal i
sfil
edagainstthesent enceont hegroundofi tsinadequacycourtshall
not
enhancethesentenceexceptaf t
ergivingt otheaccusedar easonableopportuni
tyofsowi ng
causeagainstsuchenhancement .CaseofNadi rKhanv /sState-
1976.

4.Appeal i
ncaseofAcqui t
tal
:-Inanappeal againstacquitt
alundersec.378theH/ Chasf ul
l
powert oreviewatlar get heevidenceonwhi chtheacqui tt
alisbasedandt oreachthe
conclusi
ont hattheor derofacqui tt
alshouldber eversedashel di
ncaseofMohandasv /
sSt ate
ofMP- 1973,butexer cisinghispowert heH/ Cshoul dgiveproperweightandconsiderat
ionto
thevi
ewoft hetri
al j
udgeast ot hecredi
bil
i
tyofwi tnesses,presumptionofinnocenceinfavour
oftheaccused.Andar ightoftheaccusedt ot hebenef i
tofanydoubt .I
twasal sohel
dinSt ate
ofU.P.v/sGambi rSingh- 2005caseofappeal againstacquittali
fonsameev i
dencetwov iews
arepossible,theonei nf avourofaccusedmustbepr efer
red.

Duringtheheari
ngofappeal f
rom theor derofacqui
ttal
itshoul
dbet akenintoconsi
derat
ion
thatther
eisnomi scarri
ageofjusti
ce,caseAllahr
akhaK.Mansur iv/
sSt ateofGujr
at-
2002.The
orderofacquit
talcannotbedismissedmer elyonthegroundthatasecondappr oachcouldhav
e
beenappliedi
nt hecaseanditmeanst hattheaccusedcouldhavebeenconv ict
edon
consideri
nganotherviewacaseofChandr aSinghv/sStateofGujr
at-2002.

COMPLAI
NTCASE

DEFINITION:–Sec.200say s,t
hatt heprel
imi
narypr
ocedurewhichaMagist
rateshallf
oll
owon
recei
vingacompl ai
nt.Iti
sobligatoryt
oexaminethecomplai
nantandthewitnessesanda
summar ydismissalwit
houtthem isnotlegal
.Thesubst
anceofsuchexaminationshal
lbe
reducedtowrit
ingandshallbesi gnedbythecomplai
nantandthewit
nessesandal sobythe

51
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Magistr
ate.I
fapubli
cservantacti
ngorpur
porti
ngtoacti
nthedischar
geofhisoff
ici
alduti
esor
acourthasmadet hecomplaintort
hemagist
ratemakesovert
hecasef ori
nqui
ryortr
ialt
o
anot
herMagi st
rat
eundersec.192.

1. Pr ocedurebyMagi st
ratenotcompetenttot akecogni
zanceoft hecase: I
facompl ai
nt
madet oaMagistratewhoi snotcompetenttot akecogni
zanceoftheof fenceheshallreturni
t
forpresentat
iontothepropercourtwit
hanendor sementtothateffectorwher et
hecompl ai
nt
i
snoti nwr i
ti
ngthenhewi lldi
rectt
hecompl ainanttothepropercourtaspr ov
idedinsec.201of
Cr.P.
C.CaseofRaj enderSinghv/sStat
eofBi har,1989.

2. ToPost ponementofi ssueofPr ocess:-Sec.202ofthecodepr ov

idedthatwher eitappears
tothemagi strat
et hatt
heof fencecompl ai
nedi stri
abl
eexclusi
velybyt hecourtofSessionsor
wherethecompl ai
nthasnotbeenmadebyacour tunlesst
hecompl ainantandthewi tnesses
presenthavebeenexami nedonoat hundersec. 200.Ifaninvesti
gati
oni smadebyaper sonnot
beingaPoliceof fi
cerheshal lhaveforthatinvesti
gati
onallt
hepower sconf er
redbythi scode
onanof fi
cerinchar geofapol icestat
ionexceptt hepoweroar r
estwithoutwar r
ant.Sec.has
provi
dedtoascer t
ainthefoll
owi ng:

i
)toascer
tai
nthef
act
sconst
it
uti
ngt
heof
fence.

i
i)Topreventabuseofpr
ocessr
esul
ti
ngi
nwast
ageoft
imeoft
hecour
tandhar
assmentt
othe
accused.

i
i
i)Tohelpthemagistr
atetojudgei
fthereissuff
ici
entgr
oundf
orcal
l
ingt
hei
nvest
igat
ionand
f
orproceedi
ngwit
ht hecase.Case:
BalrajKhannav/sMotir
am-
1971.

3. Di smissal ofComplaint
: –AMagi st
ratemaydi smi ssacomplaintifaft
erconsi
deringthe
statementonoat hofthecompl ainantandoft hewi t
nessesandt heresultofi
nquiryor
i
nv est
igationundersec.202.Butwher etherei
ssuf fi
cientgroundforprecedi
ngtheMagi st
rat
e
cannotdi smisst hecomplaintundersec.203oft hecode.I fhefi
ndsthatnoof f
encehasbeen
commi t
ted, i
fhedistr
uststhestatementori fhedistruststhecomplainantmaydi r
ectforfurt
her
i
nqui r
y.Insuchcaseshemayr efuset oissueprocess.CaseSul abChandr av/
sAbdul a-1926.
Thesear et heprovisi
onsundersec. 203ofCr .
P.C.

ANTI
CIPATORYBAI
L

I
NTRODUCTION:
–Ant i
cipat
orybail
hasani mport
antplacei
ntheseri
esofBai
l
.It
smainobject
i
stoprot
ectt
hei
nnocentpersonsfr
om arr
estundersec.438ofthecr
imi
nalpr
ocedur
ecode-
1973l
aysdownt
heprovi
sionsregardi
nggrantofant
ici
pator
ybail
.

Whati
sAnt
ici
pat
oryBai
l
:–I
n-spi
teoft
hef
actt
hatt
heCr
.P.
C.,
hasnotdef
inedAnt
ici
pat
oryBai
l

52
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

butitmeansthatwhenaper sonhasar easontobelievethathemaybear r

estedonaccusati
on
ofhav i
ngcommi t
tedanon-bail
abl
eof f
ence,hemayappl ytoHighCour
tortothecourtof
Sessionthati
ntheeventofsucharrestheshallbereleasedonbailatt
hatti
mei ti
santi
cipat
ory
bai
l.Iti
salsocal
ledApprehensi
onBai l
ont hebasi
sofpr ovisi
onslai
ddowninsec.438ofcr .
P.C.

ObjectoftheAnt i
cipat
oryBail:
-TheobjectofAnti
cipator
ybaili
stoprotectaper sonfr
om arr
est
.
Aper sonagainstwhom awar r
antofar
r esthasbeenissuedshall
fir
stbearrestedkeptin
custodyforfewday sandt henrel
easedonbai l
,i
tmeanswher ethereisnopur poseforthe
arr
estheshal lnotbearrested.

Whenant i
cipatoryBai l
woul dbeAccept ed:-Secti
on438( 1)say sthat,“whenanyper sonhas
reasont obelievethathemaybear rest
edonanaccusat ionofhav i
ngcommi tt
edanon- bail
abl
e
offence,hemayappl ytotheHighCour torcour tofSessionf oradi r
ect i
onunderthissec.438(1)
andcour tifthinksitfit
,candirectthatinev entofsucharrestheshal lberel
easedonbai l
.”Case
ofGur bakshSi nghv /sStateofPunj ab-
1980, hewasnotgr antedant i
cipator
ybailmer elyonfear
ofarrest.I
nasi milarcaseofAshokkumarv /sSt
ateofRaj asthan-1980, t
hatanti
cipatorybail
shouldnotaccept edunt i
lther
ei sadefini
tef earofarr
estandsuchf acthascomebef orethe
court.Iti
sper ti
nentt oment i
onher ethatreasont obeli
evedoesnotmeanmer efear ,
i.e.mere
‘
fear’isnotsuf fi
cientcause.Gr oundsonwhi chbeli
efisbasedmustbecapabl eofbei ng
exami ned.

1. Whoshal
lacceptt
heAnt
ici
pat
oryBai
l

a.Sec.438(1)t
hatthef
oll
owi
ngaut
hor
it
iesmayacceptt
heant
ici
pat
orybai
lappl
i
cat
ion:
High
Court,
CourtofSessi
on.

Thatanyaccusedofanof
fenceandincust
odybereleasedonbai
lonaccept
anceofbai
l
appl
icat
ioni
nt heabov
esai
dcourtsu/s439ofCr
.P.C.

Conditi
onsofGr antAnti
cipat
oryBail
:-
Courtcani
mposer easonabl
econdit
ionsf
orgrantof
ant
icipatorybai
l.Thosecondit
ionshavebeenmentionedinsecti
on438(
2).WhentheHi gh
CourtorCour tofSessi
onmakeadi r
ecti
onwithsomecondi t
ionsi
nthel
ightoft
hefactsofthe
par
ticularcaseasitmayt hi
nkfitf
orbail
:-

a.Thatt
heper
sonshal
lnotl
eav
eIndi
awi
thoutpr
evi
ousper
missi
onoft
hecour
t.

b.Thatpersondirect
lyorindi
rect
lymakeaninducementt
hreatorpromisetoanyperson
acquaint
edwiththefactsofthecasesoastodissuadehi
mf r
om discl
osingsuchfactst
othe
courtortoanypoli
ceOfficer
.

c.Thattheper
sonshal
lmakehi
msel
fav
ail
abl
efori
nter
rogat
ionbyapol
i
ceof
fi
cerasandwhen
requi
red.

53
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

POWERSOFCRI
MINALCOURTS

I
NTRODUCTI ON: –Chapt
erII
Iofthecri
minalpr
ocedur ecodedeal
swi t
hthePower sofCour
tsto
takecognizanceoftheof
fences.Fort
hispur
poset heoffencesar
edivi
dedintotwogroups,
i)
OffencesunderIPC,andi
i)off
encesunderanyotherlaw.Thecourtsbywhichthesetwo
offencesaretri
ablear
especi
fiedbel
ow:-

Court
sbywhichtheset
wooffencesar
et r
iabl
e:–Asperpr
ovi
sionsl
aiddowni
nsect
ion26of
thecod,
thecour
tsbywhichoff
encesaretri
abl
e:-

3.a)Anyof
fenceunderI
PC-
45maybet
ri
edbyHi
ghCour
t.

B)Sessi
onCour
t.

c)Anyot
hercour
tbywhi
chsuchof
fencei
sshowni
nthef
ir
stschedul
etobet
ri
abl
e.

4.Anyoff
enceunderanyot
herl
aw,
whenanyCour
tisment
ionedi
nthi
sbehal
finsuchl
aw,
is
tr
iedby
:

i
)Hi
ghCour
t.

i
i
)Anyot
hercour
tbywhi
chsuchof
fencei
sshowni
nthef
ir
stschedul
e.

Sect
ion27:Jur
isdi
cti
oninthecaseofJuv
eni
les:Anyoffencenotpunishablewit
hdeat hor
i
mprisonmentforl
i
fewhoatt hedat
ewhenheappearsori sbroughtbeforecourtundertheage
of16yearsmaybet r
iedbythecour
tofCJM oranyothercourtwhichspecial
l
yempower ed.

SentenceswhichHighCourtsandSessionJudgesmaypass: –Asperprovi
sionl
aiddowni n
Sect.28ofthecodethat
:-(i
)HighCourtmaypassanysent enceaut
hori
zedbylaw.(i
i)Sessi
on
JudgeorADJmaypassanysent enceauthori
zedbylawbutanysentenceofdeathpassedby
suchjudgesshall
besubjecttoconfi
rmati
onbyt heHighCourt.

Sent
enceswhichMagistrat
esmaypass: -Sec.
29ofCode,
ThecourtofCJM maypassany
sent
enceauthori
zedbylawexceptsentenceofdeat
horofimpr
isonmentf
orli
feor
i
mprisonmentforater
m exceedi
ng7y ears.

ThecourtofMagi
str
ateofFi
rstCl
assmaypassasentenceofi
mpr
isonmentf
orat
erm not
exceedi
ngthr
eeyear
soroffi
nenotexceedi
ngRs.
10,000.

54
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Thecourtof2ndClassMagist
ratemaypassanimpr
isonmentf
orat
erm notexceedi
ngOne
yearoroffi
nenotexceedi
ngRs.5000/
-orofbot
h.

SentenceofImpri
sonmentindefaul
toff
ine:
-Thecour
tofMagi
str
atemayawardsuchter
m of
i
mpr i
sonmentindefaul
tofpaymentoffi
neasauthori
zedbyl
awundersec.
30ofthecode,not
exceedingonefour
thoftheter
m ofimpr
isonmentandal
sonotexcessoft
hepowers.

SUMMARYTRI
ALS

Onthebasi sofpr ovisi

onsundersect i
on260oft hecode, powertot r
ysummar il
y:–
notwithstandi
ngany thi
ngcont ainedinthi
scode,AnyCJM, Anymetropolit
anMagi str
at eorany
Magi str
ateoft hef i
rstclassspecial
lyempower edinthisbehalfbytheHi ghCour t
,mayi fthi
nks
fi
ttryasummar ywayi nal loranyofthefoll
owingof f
ences.Summar ytri
alcanalsobedoneby
themagi strat
eofsecondcl assu/s261oft hecode; t
heHi ghCourtmayconf eronany
magi str
ateinvest edwitht hepowersofaMagi strateofthesecondcl ass.Ifanyfr
om t heabove
Magi str
ate’sthinksfit,
mayt r
yinasummar ywayf oralloranyofthef ol
lowingoffences:-

1.Of fencesnotpuni
shabl
ewi
thdeat
himpr
isonmentf
orl
i
fei
mpr
isonmentf
orat
erm
exceedingtwoyears.

2.Theftundersec.379,380and381ofI
PCwher
ethev
alueoft
hepr
oper
tyst
olendoesnot
exceedt
wot housandrupees.

3.Receivi
ngofretai
ningofst
olenproper
tyundersec.
411,
IPC,
wher
ethev
alueoft
hepr
oper
ty
doesnotexceedtwothousandrupees.

4.Assist
ingi
ntheconceal
mentordi sposal
ofst ol
enpropert
yundersec.414ofI
PC,
wher
ethe
val
ueofsuchproper
tydoesnotexceedtwot housandrupees.

5.Of
fencesundersect
ion454and455ofI
PC.

6.I
nsultwi
thint
enttoprov
okeabr eachoft hepeaceundersec.504andwi t
himpri
sonmentf
or
ter
m whichmayextendtotwoy ear
sorwi t
hfi
neorwithboth,undersect
.506ofIPC.7.
Abetmentofanyofthefor
egoingoffences.8.Anatt
emptt ocommi tanyofthef
oregoi
ng
off
enceswhensuchat t
emptisanof fence.

Themodeoftrial
issoughtt
obealter
edunderthi
ssub-secti
onthetri
almustf
rom i
tsincept
ion
tobeconduct
edintheregul
armanner,caseofSt
atev/sD.N.Pat
el-
1971.TheMagistr
ateunder
thi
ssect
ionasadiscret
ionotr
ytheoff
encesspecif
iedint
hissecti
oninasummarilyway.

55
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

Procedureofsummar yt
ri
als:–Undersec.262oft hecodei sr
elatedtotheprocedur
ef or
summar yt
rial,
shallbethesameasi nsummonscaseexcepti nsof arasitismodifi
edbyt he
provisi
ons.Inthecaseofsummar ytr
ial t
helimitofter
m ofsentenceofimprisonmentisthree
mont hs.Howev erifthecourti
sconsi
der sitnecessarythatal
ongersentenceisnecessaryin
theinter
estofj ust
iceinanycasethetrialshoul
dbehel dasinawar rantcaseorasasummon
caseaccor dingtothenatureoftheoffence.

PLEABARGAI
NING

Undersect i
on265Aofthecode, descri
bedthattheappli
cat
ionofthepr ovi
sionsoft hissect
ion
i
nr espectofaccusedagainstwhom t hereporthasbeenforwardedbyt heofficerinchargeof
Policestati
onundersec.
173, theoffenceappearstohavebeencommi t
t edbyhi m andthe
Magi st
ratehastakencognizanceofanof fenceoncompl ai
ntotherthananof fencef orwhich
thepunishmentofdeathorl i
feimpr i
sonmentori mpri
sonmentforat er
m exceedi ngsev en
yearsandexami ni
ngcompl ainantandwi t
nessesissuedtheprocessasperl aw.

Applicati
onf orpleabar gaini
ng:Sec.265Boft hecodel
aysthatapersonaccusedofanof fence
mayf i
leapplicat
ionf orpleabargaini
ngi nthecour
tinwhichtheoff
enceispendingfortri
al.The
applicati
onaccompani edbyanaf fi
davitswornbytheaccusedstat
ingther
einthathehas
voluntari
lypreferr
edaf terunderstandi
ngt henatur
eandextentofpunishmentprovi
dedunder
thelawf ortheof fencethepl eabargaininginhi
scaseandthathehasnotpr ev
iouslybeen
conv i
ctedbyacour tinacasewhi chhehadbeenchar gedwiththesameof f
ence.

FI
NALITYOFTHEJUDGEMENT: -Thejudgmentdeli
veredbythecourtundersect
ion265Gshall
befi
nalandnoappeal
exceptthespeciall
eavepeti
ti
onunderart
icl
e136andwr i
tpeti
ti
onunder
ar
ti
cle226and227oftheIndi
anconstitut
ionshal
ll
ieinanycour
tagainstsuchjudgment.

56
 Mahendr
aLawI
nst
it
uteHi
sar9728915900

POWEROFTHECOURTI NPLEBARGAI NING:-A cour

tshall
hav efort
hepur
posesof
di
schargi
ngit
sfuncti
onsunderthepr
ovisi
onsinsecti
on265H, all
hepowersvestedi
nrespect
ofbai
l,
tri
alofof
fencesandothermatt
ersrel
ati
ngt ot
hedisposalofacaseinsuchcour
tont he
basi
sofaboveprovi
sions.

57