PROJECT ON

FRAMING OF CHARGES UNDER CrPC

__________________________________________________

SUBMITTED TO
Dr. Mohammad Asad Malik

SUBMITTED BY
Mohd Izaan Rizvi

Semester 9th , Regular batch

Acknowledgement
 First and foremost, I would like to thank Dr. Asad Malik, faculty of Law, Jamia Millia
Islamia, for creating opportunities to undertake such a valuable project

I would also like to thank my dear colleagues who had helped me a lot creating this project
with their ideas and thoughts over the topic. They act as a motivating and guiding force to
me during the making of this project.

Mohd. Izaan Rizvi

Roll No. – 33

Semester- IX (B.A.L.L.B. Hons.)( Regular)

INTRODUCTION
Meaning: “The Charge” shall give the accused full notice of the offence charged against
him. The purpose of a charge is to tell an accused person as precisely and concisely as
possible of the matter with which he is charged and must convey to him with sufficient
clearness and certainty1 what the prosecution intends to prove against him and of which he
will have to clear himself. The primary object of framing a charge is to give notice of the
essential facts which the prosecution proposes to establish to bring home charge to the
accused so that he will be able to defend and may not be prejudiced. It has been repeatedly
held that the framing of a proper charge is vital to a criminal trial and that is a matter on
which the judge should bestow the most careful attention.2

PURPOSE OF FRAMING OF CHARGES

In the ruling of a four-Judge Bench of The Hon’ble Supreme Court in V.C. Shukla v. State3.
Justice Desai delivering a concurring opinion opined that “the purpose of framing a charge is
to give intimation to the accused of clear, unambiguous and precise notice of the nature of
accusation that the accused is called upon to meet in the course of a trial”.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHARGE AND TRAIL

1 Jaswantrai v. Stae of Bombay, AIR 1956 SC 575 (585): 1956 SCR 483(504-05): 1956 CrLJ 1116; Willie
Slaney v. State of M.P., AIR 1956 SC 116; (1955) 2 SCR 1140: 1956 CrLJ 291.

2 Balakrishnan v. State, AIR 1958 Ker 283; Basavaraja v. State of Karnataka, (2008) 9SCC 329:
(2008) 3 SCC (Cri) 767.
3
1980 AIR 962.
 TRIAL
The prosecutor files the “charge-sheet “charge/s” in
the court.
The charge-sheet contains FIR, police report,
investigation, names and description of the accused
and witnesses, etc.
Preparing and filing of the charge-sheet are done by
police and prosecutor, which is purely executive
nature.
A private person cannot file charge-sheet. He can
file complaint in non-cognizable offences.
Generally, the majority of the cases filed by the
police belong to cognizance offences.
Upto filing the charge-sheet, it is in the “Pre-Trial
Process.”
EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED AND FRAMING OF
CHARGES
1. After receiving the
charge-sheet, the Magistrate takes t
cognizance of the case and starts
proceedings.
2. Cognizance of the case receives the
charge-sheet is the first step of the trial,
and the trial includes all the proceeds of
the court and ends with announcement
of judgment.
3. Trial is conducted by the court. Trial
judicial nature.
4. Whether a complaint or charge-sheet
the court conducts the proceedings
judicially.
5. As soon as the court receives/takes the
cognizance of a charge-sheet, the trial
starts which is the “Trial Process”.
We all know that under Code of Criminal Procedure 1973, four types of trials are prescribed
for adjudicating criminal cases. They are:

(1) Summary trial cases; (Section 260 to 265 Cr.PC)

(2) Trial of summons cases; (Section 251 to 259 Cr.PC)
(3) Trial of warrant cases, (Secs. 238 to 243 & 244 to 247 Cr.PC)
(4) Trial of cases triable by a Court of Session (Secs.205 to 237 Cr.PC)

Different trial procedures are adopted in the Code to enable the court to try the cases
summarily in minor offences while adopting elaborate procedure in warrant cases and more
elaborate procedure in sessions cases.

EXAMINATION OF ACCUSED
Before commencing trial of a criminal case, examination of the accused in summary trial
cases, summons trial procedure cases and warrant trial procedure cases is prescribed under
Sections 251 and 239 Cr.PC. But in trial of Sessions case by Sessions court, no specific
procedure for examination of accused before commencing trial is prescribed.

So far as the summary trial cases are concerned, the procedure for trial is laid down in
Section 262 Code of Criminal Procedure. So, in summary trial cases and summons procedure
cases, the examination of the accused has to be conducted under section 251 Code of
Criminal Procedure.

Under section 251 Code of Criminal Procedure, when the accused appears or is brought
before the Magistrate, particulars of the offence with which he is accused, or the accusation
leveled against the accused shall be stated to him and he shall be asked whether he pleads
guilty or has any defence to make. Either in summary trial cases or in summons procedure
cases, it is not at all necessary to frame a charge against the accused person. If the accused
pleads not guilty and claims to be tried after his examination under section 251 Cr.PC in a
summary trial case, court has to conduct trial by following the procedure for summary trials
and pronounce judgment under section 264 Cr.PC.

So far as trial of summons cases by the Magistrate is concerned, chapter XX of the Code of Criminal
Procedure deals with it. Section 250 to 258 Code of Criminal Procedure deal with the procedure for
trial of summons cases by Magistrates. Like, summary trial, in the trial of summons cases also the
substance of the accusation levelled against the accused i.e., particulars of the offence levelled
against the accused shall be explained to the accused and the court has to ascertain whether the
accused pleads guilty or claims to be tried or has any defence to him. In the trial of summons cases
also there is no need to frame any charge. During examination under section 251 Code of Criminal
Procedure if he pleads guilty the Magistrate shall record admission of the commission of the offence
by the accused as may be as possible in the words used by the accused and may in his discretion
convict the accused.3 The very fact that in a Summons Case there is no specific provision of a
discharge, unlike in Warrants Case (S.227/239/245 of the CrPC) speaks volumes as to the legislative
intent of not having an elaborate hearing at the time of framing of charge. What also deserves to be
borne in mind is the fact that Summons Cases were not envisaged to be as long-drawn out as
Warrants Case and the need for a specific discharge hearing was ousted.

3 http://www.mondaq.com/india/x/257582/Crime/Framing+Of+Charges+An+Overview
FRAMING OF CHARGE

The framing of a charge is not mere formality but a judicial act it is required to be performed
after application of mind. The object of Section 228 is to ensure that the court is satisfied that
the accusation made against the accused is not false and frivolous but there is some material
for proceeding against him. Reading Section 227 and 228 together, it is clear that what the
court has to see whether it is a prima facie case against the accused and he is in any manner
connected with the incident leading to the prosecution. Certain rules are given below find out
that is the case is prima facie or proper evidence against the accused:

When charge may be framed: In all warrant cases whether triable by a Court of Session or
by a Magistrate, a formal charge is required to be framed. Framing of Charge is, however,
not necessary in summons case. Similarly, it is not necessary to frame charge in summary
trials. At the stage of framing a charge, the court should consider the materials placed before
the court; there is a prima facie case against the accused.4 The test to determine prima facie
case depends upon the facts and circumstances of each case.

In Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar7 after considering the leading cases on the point, the
Supreme Court laid down the following principles as to when the charge should be framed –

(1) That the Judge while considering the question of framing the charges under Section
227of the Code to weigh the evidence for finding out whether it’s a prima facie case or not.
And for which the accused has been made out;

(2) Where the materials placed before the Court the accused which has not been properly
explained, the court will be fully justified in framing a charge and proceeding with the
trial.
(3) The test to determine a prima facie case would naturally depend upon the facts of each
case. By and large however if two views are equally possible and the Judge should be
satisfied with the evidence produced while giving rise to some suspicion but not grave
suspicion against the accused, he has all the right to discharge the accused.

4 http://myblog-rajbhu.blogspot.com/2015/05/the-charge-section-211-224-and-464-of.html
7
1979 AIR 366.
 (4) That in exercising his jurisdiction under Section 227 of the Code, the total effect of the
evidence and the document produced by the court, any basic infirmities appearing in the
case and so on. This however does not mean that the Judge should make a roving
enquiry into the pros and cons of the matter and weigh the evidence as if he was
conducting a trial.

Section 240- Framing of charge: Upon considering the police report and the documents
sent with it under Section 173 and after examining the accused and hearing the parties, if the
magistrate is of the opinion that the accused has committed an offence which he is competent
to try and could be adequately punished by him, he shall frame a charge. The charge shall be
read over and explained to the accused and he shall be asked whether he pleads guilty or
claims to be tried. Framing of charge in absence of the accused would defeat the very
purpose of Section 240(2) of the Code.

It is not necessary for the trial Court to write a reasoned or lengthy order for the purpose of
framing charges. The manner of examination of material placed by the prosecution before
the court has been thus explained by the Supreme Court.

“It is well settled that at the stage of framing of charge the trial Court is not to examine and
assess in detail the materials placed on record by the prosecution nor is it for the Court to
consider the sufficiency of the materials for the purpose of seeing whether the offence
alleged against the accused persons is made out. At the stage of charge the Court is to
examine the materials only with a view to be satisfied that a prima facie case has been made
out against the accused persons.5

Where the material on record as product by the prosecution was sufficient for framing the
charge of corruption, the Court need not wait for the public servant to satisfactorily explain
the assets position.

Where the accused, in collusion with others, defrauded the bank to the tune of over 2 crore
rupees, the Supreme Court observed that a blanket order enabling the accused not to appear

5 https://districts.ecourts.gov.in/sites/default/files/EXAMINATION%20OF%20ACCUSED%20AND
%20FRAMING% 20OF%20CHARGES1stadj.pdf
before the court during investigation and even at trial should not be passed. His presence
may become necessary for example, at the time of framing of charge.

What should a charge contain? Section 211 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,

Contents of charge:

(1) Every charge under this Code shall state the offence with which the accused is charged.
(2) If the law which creates the offence gives it any specific- name, the offence may be
described in the charge by that name only.
(3) If the law which creates the offence does not give it any specific name, so much of the
definition of the offence must be stated as to give the accused notice of the matter with
which he is charged.
(4) The law and section of the law against which the offence is said to have been committed
shall be mentioned in the charge.
(5) The fact that the charge is made is equivalent to a statement that every legal condition
required by law to constitute the offence charged was fulfilled in the particular case.
(6) The charge shall be written in the language of the Court.
(7) If the accused, having been previously convicted of any offence, is liable, by reason of
such previous conviction, to enhanced punishment, or to punishment of a different kind,
for a subsequent offence, and it is intended to prove such previous conviction for the
purpose of affecting the punishment which the Court may think fit to award for the
subsequent offence, the fact, date and place of the previous conviction shall be stated in
the charge; and if such statement has been omitted, the
Court may add it at any time before sentence is passed.6

CONTENTS OF VALID CHARGE

6 http://mja.gov.in/Site/Upload/GR/%20I%20Summ%20of%20Cri.pdf
Sections 211-214 of the code enumerate requirements and particulars which a valid charge
should contain. Looking to those provisions, it is clear that to be a valid charge; the
following requirements must be satisfied:

(i) It must state the offence with which the accused is charged;
(ii) If the law which creates the offence gives it any specific name, the offence should
be described in the charge by that name only;
(iii) If the law which creates the offence does not give any specific name, so much of the
definition of the offence must be stated as to give the accused notice of the matter
with which he is charged;
(iv) The law and section of the law against which the offence is said to have been
committed must be mentioned in the charge;
(v) It must be in writing;7
(vi) It must be in the language of the court;
(vii) If the accused has been previously convicted of any offence, and by reason of such
previous conviction, is liable to enhanced punishment or to punishment of a
different kind for a subsequent offence, the fact, date and place of the previous
conviction must be stated in the charge;
(viii) It must give particulars as to the time and place of the alleged offence and the
person against whom or the thing in respect of which the offence was committed;
However, when the accused is charged with criminal breach of trust or dishonest
misappropriation of money or other movable property, it shall be sufficient to
specify the gross sum or describe the movable property in respect of which and the
dates between which the offence is alleged to have been committed without
specifying particular items or exact items or exact dates, provided that the time
included between the first and last of such dates shall not exceed one year.

(ix) When the nature of the case is such that the above particulars do not give the
accused sufficient notice of the matter with which he is charged, the charge shall
also contain such particulars of the matter in which the alleged offence was
committed as will be sufficient for that purpose;

7 https://study.com/academy/lesson/using-the-two-charge-model-of-electric-charge.html
 (i) In every charge words used in describing an offence shall be deemed to have been
used in the sense attached to them by the law under which such offence is
punishable.

A charge must be precise in its scope and particular in its details. Such particulars should be
stated in the charge as are reasonably sufficient to give the accused notice of the matter with
which he is charged. Whether or not sufficient particulars have been mentioned in the charge
must be decided with reference to facts and circumstances of each case.8

FORM OF CHARGE
The forms in which the charges are to be framed are set out in Form No. 32 of the Second
Schedule. They provide framing of a charge with one head, with two or more heads, etc.

Form No. 32

Charges

I. CHARGE WITH ONE HEAD

(a) I, (name and office of Magistrate, etc.), hereby charge you (name
of accuse person) as follows:-
(b) That you, being a public servant in the……….….. Department,
directly accepted from (state the name) gratification other thane
legal remuneration, as a motive for forbearing to do an official act,
and thereby committed an offence publishable under section 161
of the Indian penal code, and within the cognizance of the court.
(c) And I hereby direct that you tried by this court on the said charge.

(signature and seal of the magistrate)

II. CHARGE TWO OR MORE HEADS:

(a) I, (name and office of the sessions Judge, etc.) hereby charge you (name of accused
person) as follows:-
8 http://www.legalservicesindia.com/article/1122/Framing-of-Charge-In-Criminal-Cases.html
 (b) First- that you, on or about the ……….day of ………..at……….. committed the
murder by causing the the deathof ………….., and therebycommitted an offence
punishable under Indian penal code, and within thecognizance of the court of
session.

Secondly- that you, on or about the ……….. day of …….at……… by causing the death
of ………… committed culpable homicide not amounting to murder and thereby
committed an offence punishable under section 304 of Indian penal code, and within
the cognizance of the court of session.

(c) And I hereby direct that you be tried by the said court on the said court on the said
charge.

(signature and seal of magistrate)

CONCLUSION

Law regarding framing of charges is now well settled. It is permissible for a trial Judge to
shift and weigh the evidence for the limited purpose of finding out whether or not prima
facie case against the accused has been made out or not. The material to determine prima
facie case would depend upon the facts of each case. However, it is not expected to decide
the credibility and truthfulness of the available material at the stage of charge. The disputed
defense of accused cannot be taken into consideration at this stage. Sufficiency of material or
evidence is not required for framing of charges unless court finds that the materials are
completely and absolutely absent for the purpose of trial. It is well settled that when there is
evidence indicating strong suspicion against accused, the trial court will be justified in
framing of charge and granting an opportunity to the prosecution to bring on record the
entire evidence for the purposes of trial.
 REFERENCES

Primary Source:

Bare Act “Criminal Procedure Code, 1973”

The Indian Penal Code, 1860

The Indian Evidence Act, 1872.

Secondary Source:

Books

1. C.K. Takwani, Criminal Procedure, LexisNexis.

2. Justice Y.V. Chandrachud, V.R. Manohar, Ratanlal & Dhirajlal, Ratanlal and Dhirajlal,
The Code of Criminal Procedure 20th Edition, LexixNexis/ Butterworth
3. K.N. Chandrasekharan Pillai, R.V. Kelkar's Lectures on Criminal Procedure; 4th Edition,
Reprinted 2011 (EBC)
4. S.C. Sarkar, Sarkar on the Law of Criminal Procedure, LexisNexis Butterworths

Articles:

a. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chargesheet

b. http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-05-17/delhi/31748533_1_closure-
c. report-talwar-couple-rajkumar-and-vijay-mandal

d. http://legalperspectives.blogspot.in/2010/10/framing-of-charge-in-criminal-trial-
law.html