CHARGE, ADDITION AND ALTERATION OF CHARGE

Submitted by:
Anmol Mittal
Class: BBA. LL.B. Division: A PRN: 19010224005

of Symbiosis Law School, NOIDA

Symbiosis International(Deemed University) , PUNE

by Unknown Author is licensed

under

Under the guidance of

Dr. Meera Mathew
Assistant professor
 CHARGE, ADDITION AND ALTERATION OF CHARGE

INTRODUCTION

The term “charge” is defined under Section 2(b) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, 1973. The purpose of a charge is to inform the accused about the
offence that he has been charged with, so that he can have an opportunity to
prepare for his defense.1

According to Section 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 any court
may alter or add to any charge at any time before pronouncement of a
judgement. Such charge which is altered or added shall be read and explained to
the accused.”

If the court is of the opinion that proceeding with the ongoing trial, after the
alteration or addition of charge gives rise to prejudice to the accused or
prosecutor, then the court may direct a new trial or adjourn the trial as may be
necessary2.

In case, if the offence which is altered or added in the charge necessities

prosecution for previous sanction then the case shall not be proceeded with until
such sanction is obtained or unless the sanction was already obtained on same
facts of altered or added charges.

RESEARCH QUESTION

Judicial conflicts are not something new in our laws. There is always some or
the other provision within laws that are controversial. This research addresses
one such question, that is:

 Whether the Trial Court can add or alter charges at any time even,
after a judgement is reserved?

1
V. C. Shukla v. State Through C.B.I, 1980 SCR (2) 380.
2
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, § 216, Acts of Parliament. 1973.
Section 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 states that a court may
alter or add to any charge at any time before the judgement is pronounced. The
research question addressed, questions the powers of the Trial Court to add and
alter any charge even after the completion of evidence, arguments heard and the
judgment reserved. There have been no requisite circumstances in which
addition or alteration may be made or not, in Section 216 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973.3 The primary concern here is with the scope of
Section 216, Cr.P.C. and power of court to alter or add to the charge at any time
before judgement is pronounced.

This a serious question which needs to be discussed as alteration or addition in

any charge after the judgement is reserved and before the date of
pronouncement can also be done intentionally for the delay in the proceedings.
The object of the Section 216, Cr.P.C. is to ensure a fair trial and the Court is to
see as to whether alteration or addition to any charge at any time before the
judgment is pronounced is called for or not 4, addition or alteration in the charge
at the final stage of arguments can have an adverse effect on the case.

ANALYSIS

In my opinion, under the provision of Section 216, Cr.P.C., court has power to
alter or add to the change at any time before the pronouncement of judgement
even after the judgement is reserved. Such an alteration or addition is to be read
and explained to the accused. Section 216(1), Cr.P.C. provides the addition or
alteration of any charge can be done at any time before the judgement is
pronounced. The phrase “at any time” and “before the judgement is
pronounced” indicates that the power with the courts is wide and can be
exercised in appropriate cases.

By using textualist approach of interpretation, that is by reading the plain text of

statute and concluding the meaning of statue according to the text 5, it is clear
from the plain reading of the text that power given to courts for alteration or
addition to the change at any time before the pronouncement of judgement is
unrestricted.

Section 216(2) to (5), Cr.P.C. ensures that any alteration or addition to any
charge should not be prejudice to the accused or prosecutor6. Merely because
the charges are altered after the judgement is reserved, but before the

3
Jasvinder Saini v. State (Govt. of NCT of Delhi), 2013(7) SCC 256.
4
Rockey Benediek v. State of Sikkim 2003 SIK 21.
5
Alekhya Reddy, Literally interpreting the law– A appraisal of the literal rule of Interpretation in
Indi, Manupatra (2019)
6
Supra note 3.
pronouncement of judgement cannot result in prejudice to the accused because
sufficient safeguards have been built in Section 216, Cr.P.C. and other related
provisions.7

Needless to say, the Trial Court can add and alter any charge even after the
completion of evidence, arguments heard and the judgment reserved. The statute in its
plain text has not prescribed any time limit either for alteration or for addition of
charge. The legislative intent is clear and unambiguous that charge can be altered or
added by the court at any time before the judgment is pronounced.

Once there is an alteration or addition of charge, then that is required to be read and
explained to the accused. In appropriate cases, the court may direct a new trial or may
adjourn the trial for a reasonable period, so that no prejudice is caused to the accused
or the prosecutor after such alteration or amendment of the charge.

In case of Dr. Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh 8, the court held that
the court must exercise its powers under Section 216 judiciously and ensure that no
prejudice is caused to the accused and that he is allowed to have a fair trial. The only
constraint on the court’s power is the prejudice likely to be caused to the accused by
the addition or alteration of charges. Sub-Section accordingly prescribes the approach
to be adopted by the courts where prejudice may be caused.

The use of the words at any time before judgment is pronounced in Sub-Section
empowers the court to exercise its powers of altering or adding charges even after
the completion of evidence, arguments and reserving of the judgment. The alteration
or addition of a charge may be done if in the opinion of the court there was an
omission in the framing of charge or if upon prima facie examination of the material
brought on record, it leads the court to form a presumptive opinion as to the
existence of the factual ingredients constituting the alleged offence.

Addition of a charge merely commences the trial for the additional charges,
whereupon, based on the evidence, it is to be determined whether the accused may
be convicted for the additional charges. The court must exercise its powers under
Section 216 judiciously and ensure that no prejudice is caused to the accused and
that he is allowed to have a fair trial. The only constraint on the court’s power is the
prejudice likely to be caused to the accused by the addition or alteration of charges.

The phrase “at any time” used in Section 216(1), Cr.P.C. empowers courts to
exercise its power to alter or add changes even after the completion of evidence,
arguments and reserving of the judgement. The power of the court to alter or
add to any change before judgement pronounced is unrestricted.

7
Dr. Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy v. State of Andhra Pradesh, Supreme Court of India, Criminal
Appeal No. 1934 of 2019.
8
Supra note 7.