Criminal Procedure Code - CRPC Notes

9/1/2019 Criminal Procedure Code - CrPC Notes - LawOrdo
Criminal Procedure Code – CrPC Notes

By admin - September 21, 2018
lawordo.com
Criminal Procedure Code – CrPC Notes

QUESTION`1:- Discuss the Rights of an arrested person?
ANSWER:- Cr P C gives powers to the police for arresting a person with such power Cr P.C
also provides rights to an arrested person. Rights of an arrested are as follows –
1. Right to know the grounds of arrest – Section 50(1) – According to this provision, every
police officer or other person arresting any person without warrant shall forthwith
communicate to him full particulars of the offence for which he is arrested or any other
grounds for such arrest.
In case of Udaybhan Shuki vs State of UP 1999 CrLJ, All HC held that right to be notified of
grounds of arrest is a precious right of the arrested person. This allows him to move the
proper court for bail, make a writ petition for habeas corpus, or make appropriate
arrangements for his defence.
2. Right to be informed of the provision for bail – Section 50(2) – Section 50(2), provides
that where a police officer arrests any person other than a person accused of a non-bailable
offence without warrant, he shall inform the person arrested that he is entitled to be
released on bail and that he may arrange for sureties on his behalf.
3. Right to be taken to magistrate without delay – Section 57 – of CrPC. It says that, No

police officer shall detain in custody a person arrested without warrant for a longer period
than under all the circumstances of the case is reasonable, and such period shall not, in the
absence of a special order of a Magistrate under Section 167, exceed twenty four hours
https://www.lawordo.com/criminal-procedure-code-crpc-notes/ 1/58
exclusive of the time necessary for the journey from the place of arrest to the Magistrate’s
court.
In case of, Khatri (II) vs State of Bihar 1981 SCC, SC has strongly urged upon the State
and its police to ensure that this constitutional and legal requirement of bringing an
arrested person before a judicial magistrate within 24 hours should be met. This allows
magistrates to keep a check on the police investigation. It is essential that the magistrates
should try to enforce this requirement and when they find it disobeyed, they should come
heavily upon the police.
Further, in case of, Sharifbai vs Abdul Razak, AIR 1961, SC held that if a police officer fails
to produce an arrested person before a magistrate within 24 hours, he shall be held guilty
of wrongful detention.
4. Right to consult Legal Practitioner – Section 303- Under section 303 it is mentioned that
any person accused of offence before a Criminal Court or against whom proceedings are
instituted under this Code, may have right to be defended by a pleader of his choice.
5. Right to free legal aid – Section 304 – Section 304 provides that where, in a trial before
the Court of Session, the accused is not represented by a pleader, and where appears to
the Court that the accused has not sufficient means to engage a pleader, the Court shall
assign a pleader for his defence at the expense of the State. In Suk Das vs Union Territory
of Arunachal Pradesh 1986, SCC, SC has held that non-compliance of this requirement or
failure to inform the accused of this right would spoil the trial entailing setting aside of the
conviction and sentence. The right of an accused to consult his lawyer begins from the
moment of his arrest. The consultation with the lawyer may be within the presence of a
police officer, but not within the police officer’s hearing. SC also held that it is the duty on
all courts and magistrates to inform the indegent person about his right to get free legal
aid.
https://www.lawordo.com/
6. Right to be informed about the right to inform of his arrest to his relative or friend –
Section 50 A (1) provides that once the arrested person is brought to the police station, the
police officer must inform a relative or a friend, or any other person of the arrested person’s
choice, about his arrest. He must also tell the place where the arrested person has been
kept. Further, as per Section 50 A (3) he must note down the name and address of the
person who was informed about the arrest. To make sure that there is no violation of this
right, section 50 A (4) makes it a duty of the magistrate to verify that the provisions of this
section were complied with. This allows the arrested person and his well wishers to take
appropriate legal steps to secure his release.
7. Right to be examined by a medical practitioner – While Section 53 allows a police officer

to get the accused examined by a registered medical practitioner, Section 54(1) gives the
accused a right to get himself examined by a registered medical practitioner. According to
Section 54 (1), when a person who is arrested, whether on a charge or otherwise, alleges,
at the time when he is produced before a Magistrate or at any time during, the period of his
detention in custody that the examination of his body will afford evidence which will
disprove the commission by him of any offence or which Magistrate shall, if requested by
the arrested person so to do direct the examination of’ the body of such person by a
registered medical practitioner unless the Magistrate considers that the request is made for
the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of Justice.
In case of Sheela Barse vs State of Maharashtra 1983 SCC, SC held that the arrested
accused person must be informed by the magistrate about his right to be medically
examined in terms of Section 54(1).
QUESTION 2:- Elaborate the trial of Warrant of cases by a Magistrate?

Answer:- There are two different procedures prescribed for trial of warrant cases by a
Magistrate:
1) Procedure of trial of warrant cases instituted on a police report.
2) Procedure of trial of warrant cases instituted otherwise than on a police report.
Sections 238 to 243 both inclusive relate exclusively to the procedure of trials in cases
initiated on police report whereas sections 244 to 247, both inclusive, relate exclusively to
the procedure in cases initiated otherwise than on police report. Section 248 relates to
both.
A.-Cases instituted on a police report
Section 238 – Compliance with section 207
When in any warrant-case instituted on a police report, the accused appears or is brought
before a Magistrate at the commencement of the trial; the Magistrate shall satisfy himself
that he has complied with the provisions of section 207 of the act.
A case instituted upon a police report means a case initiated on a charge-sheet submitted
by the police officer in a cognizable case. Any other case initiated in any other manner is a
case initiated otherwise-than on a police report.
Before proceeding with the case, the Magistrate has to ascertain as to whether the copies of
documents require to be supplied to the accused according to Section 207 have been
complied with. If they have not been so complied, the Magistrate should get them supplied
and then proceed with the case.
If a warrant case is tried as a summons case, the trial vitiates.
Section 239 – When accused shall be discharged
If, upon considering the police report and the documents sent with it under section 173 and
making such examination of the accused as the Magistrate thinks necessary and after giving
the prosecution and the accused an opportunity of being heard, the Magistrate considers
the charge against the accused to be groundless, he shall discharge the accused, and
record his reasons for so doing.
Under Section 239, Magistrate has the power to discharge the accused if upon the
consideration of the documents sent to him under Section 173 and the examination of the
accused, if any, he thinks necessary and after giving an opportunity to the prosecution and
the accused being heard, he considers that the charge against the accused is groundless. If
on the consideration of the documents and after the examination of the accused and after
hearing the prosecution and the defence, the Magistrate is of opinion that there is a ground
for presuming that the accused has committed an offence triable under this chapter with
such Magistrate is competent to try and which he can adequately punish, he shall frame in
writing a charge.
The examination of the accused under sections 239 and 240 is meant only to get
explanation from the accused of the incriminating circumstances appearing in the
documents sent up under Section 173. It is discretionary with the Magistrate to examine
the accused. It is not obligatory to examine an accused.
The Magistrate has to record reasons for discharging the accused. Failure to record the
reasons makes the order illegal. The recording of reasons for discharge is essential so that
the Higher Courts may be able to know as to be of opinion that the charge should not be
framed and the accused should be discharged.
Section 240 – Framing of charge
If, upon such consideration examination and hearing, the Magistrate is of opinion that there
is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence triable under this
Chapter, which such Magistrate is competent to try and which, in his opinion could be
adequately punished by him, he shall frame in writing a charge against the accused.
Then, the charge shall be read and explained to the accused, and he shall be asked whether
he pleads guilty of the offence charged or claims to be tried.
A Magistrate shall frame a charge if there is a ground for presuming that the accused has
committed an offence, the offence is triable under this chapter, the Magistrate is competent
to try it and the accused can be adequately punished by him.
A Magistrate can frame a charge in a case where is ground for presuming that the accused
has committed an offence triable under this Chapter, that is to say, The offence must be
punishable to imprisonment for a period exceeding two years. If the offence which appears
to be triable as a summon case, no charge should be framed, though the accused may be
tried without framing any charge as a summons case, similarly if the case is triable as a
Sessions trial, no charge can be framed by the Magistrate.
A Magistrate can frame a charge under Section 240 only when he is competent to try the
case. A Magistrate may not be competent to try the case if the offence has been committed
beyond the local jurisdiction of his Court.
The charge framed shall be read over and explained to the accused and he should be asked
whether he pleads guilty or not. Charge shall be read over the accused and not the pleader.
It has been held that the charge may be explained to the counsel of the accused and he
may be allowed to plead or not to plead on behalf of the accused. But this view is not
correct. The charge has to be explained to the accused and the accused has to plead guilty
or not.
Section 241 – Conviction on plea of guilty
If the accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate shall record the plea and may, on his discretion,
convict him thereon.
If the accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate should record his plea in his own words and
clearly.
The Magistrate has discretion to convict an accused on his plea of guilty. But the plea of
guilty must be clear. It is admission of all the facts on which the charge is founded and also
the admission of guilt in respect of them. When the accused pleaded not guilty at the time
of charge being read over to him and the Magistrate proceeded to take evidence but
afterwards the accused accepted the guilt, it was held that he could not be convicted under
Section 241.
The plea of the accused must be recorded as much as possible in the very words of the
accused so that the higher courts may determine whether the plea of the accused really
amounted to a confession of the guilt.
Section 242 – Evidence for prosecution
If the accused refuses to plead or does not plead, or claims to be tried or the Magistrate
does not convict the accused under section 241 the Magistrate shall fix a date for the
examination of witnesses.
Provided that the Magistrate shall supply in advance to the accused, the statement of
witnesses recorded during investigation by the police.
The Magistrate may, on the application of the prosecution, issue a summons to any
witnesses directing him to attend or to produce any document or other thing,
On the date so fixed, the Magistrate shall proceed to take all such evidence as may be
produced in support of the prosecution:
Provided that the Magistrate may permit the cross-examination of any witness to be
deferred until any other witness or witnesses have been examined or recall any witness for
further cross-examination
When the accused does not plead guilty or claims to be tried or even on plea of guilty the
Magistrate does not convict him, he shall fix a date for the examination of witnesses. It is
for the benefit of the accused that this provision for fixing a date has been provided. If the
Magistrate after the statement of accused not pleading guilty, straight way proceeds with
the case, the accused may be prejudiced and such proceeding certainly makes the trial
illegal.
On the date so fixed, the Magistrate is bound to take all the evidence by the prosecution.
The provision of Section 242(3) is mandatory. There can be no doubt that the Magistrate is
bound to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. A
Magistrate is not competent to acquit the accused without taking all the evidence which is
offered by the prosecution. If he does acquit without taking all the evidence, the order is
illegal.
Under section 242(3) which is in very wide term, the Magistrate is bound to take all such
evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. There is ample authority in
support of the view that if in the course of the trial, the prosecution thinks it necessary to
file additional documents or statements of witnesses on which they proposes to rely, the
non-supply of copies does not prevent them from filing the documents or examining the
witnesses.
It is not the bounden duty of the court to compel the attendance of the witnesses suo moto
and examine them under Section 311, even if the prosecution does not care to produce
them. The court may help the prosecution in securing the attendance of the witnesses. The
prosecution has to give the list of the witnesses and pray for issue of summons and the
summons being infructuous, the prosecution has to approach the Court for warrant etc. If
the prosecution fails to take steps and does not produce evidence, the court may close the
prosecution evidence and proceed further and may acquit the accused.
The term examination means the examination, cross-examination and re-examination.

Consequently, when a witness is examined by the prosecution on the date fixed for taking
evidence, the witness has to be cross-examined by the accused. But in suitable cases the
Magistrate may postpone the cross-examination of a witness who has been examined by
the prosecution till other witness or witnesses have been examined. This provision is for the
benefit of the accused to give him opportunity to cross-examine all the witnesses in
continuation.
Section 243 – Evidence for defence
The accused shall then be called upon to enter upon his defence and produce his evidence;
and if the accused puts in any written statement, the Magistrate shall file it with the record.
If the accused, after he had entered upon his defence, applies to the Magistrate to issue
any process for compelling the attendance of any witness for the purpose of examination or
cross-examination, or the production of any document or other thing, the Magistrate shall
issue such process unless he considers that such application should be refused on the
ground that it is made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of
justice and such ground shall be recorded by him in writing:
Provided that, when the accused has cross-examined or had the opportunity of cross-
examining any witness before entering on his defence, the attendance of such witness shall
not be compelled under this section, unless the Magistrate is satisfied that it is necessary
for the ends of justice.
The Magistrate may, before summoning any witness on an application under Sub-Section
(2), require that the reasonable expenses incurred by the witness in attending for the
purposes of the trial be deposited in Court.
B.-Cases instituted otherwise than on police report
Section 244 – Evidence for prosecution
When, in any warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report the accused appears
or is brought before a Magistrate, the Magistrate shall proceed to hear the prosecution and
take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. The Magistrate
may, on the application of the prosecution, issue a summons to any of its witnesses
directing him to attend or to produce any document or other thing.
Section 245 – When accused shall be discharged
If, upon taking all the evidence referred to in section 244 the Magistrate considers, for
reasons to be recorded, that no case against the accused has been made out which, if
unrebutted, would warrant his conviction, the Magistrate shall discharge him.
Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prevent a Magistrate from discharging the
accused at any previous stage of the case if, for reasons to be recorded by such Magistrate,
he considers the charge to be groundless.
Section 246 – Procedure where accused is not discharged.
If, when such evidence has been taken, or at any previous stage of the case, the Magistrate
is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence
triable under this Chapter, which such Magistrate is competent to try and which, in his
opinion, could be adequately punished by him, he shall frame in writing a charge against
the accused.
The charge shall then be read and explained to the accused, and he shall be asked whether
he pleads guilty or has any defence to make.
If the accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate shall record the plea, and may, in his discretion,
convict him thereon.
If the accused refuses to plead, or does not plead or claims to be tried or if the accused is
not convicted under Sub-Section (3) he shall be required to stale, at the commencement of
the next hearing of the case or, if the Magistrate for reasons to be recorded in writing so
thinks fit, forthwith whether he wishes to cross-examine any, and if so, which, of the
witnesses for the prosecution whose evidence has been taken.
If he says he does so wish, the witnesses named by him shall be recalled and, after cross-
examination and re-examination (if any), they shall be discharged.
The evidence of any remaining witnesses for the prosecution shall next be taken and after
cross-examination and re-examination (if any), they shall also be discharged.
Section 247 – Evidence for defence.
The accused shall then be called upon to enter upon his defence and produce his evidence;
and the provisions of section 243 shall apply to the case.
C.-Conclusion of trial
Section 248 – Acquittal or conviction
If, in any case under this Chapter in which a charge has been framed, the Magistrate finds
the accused not guilty, he shall record an order of acquittal.
Where, in any case under this Chapter, the Magistrate finds the accused guilty, hut does not
proceed in accordance with the provisions of section 325 or section 360, he shall, after
hearing the accused on the question of sentence, pass sentence upon him according to law.
Where, in any case under this Chapter, a previous conviction is charged under the
provisions of Sub-Section (7) of section 211 and the accused does not admit that he has
been previously convicted as alleged in the charge, the Magistrate may, after he has
convicted the said accused, take evidence in respect of the alleged previous conviction, and
shall record a finding thereon:
Provided that no such charge shall be read out by the Magistrate nor shall the accused be
asked to plead thereto nor shall the previous conviction be referred to by the prosecution or
in any evidence adduced by it, unless and until the accused has been convicted under Sub-
Section (2).
Section 249 – Absence of complainant
When the proceedings have been instituted upon complaint, and on any day fixed for the
hearing of the case, the complainant is absent, and the offence may be lawfully
compounded or is not a cognizable offence, the Magistrate may, in his discretion,
notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, at any time before the charge has been
framed, discharge the accused.
Section 250 – Compensation for accusation without reasonable cause.
If, in any case instituted upon complaint or upon information given to a police officer or to a
Magistrate, one or more persons is or are accused before a Magistrate of any offence triable
by a Magistrate, and the Magistrate by whom the case is heard discharges or acquits all or
any of the accused, and is of opinion that there was no reasonable ground for making the
accusation against them or any of them, the Magistrate may, by his order of discharge or
acquittal, if the person upon whose complaint or information the accusation was made is
present, call upon him forthwith to show cause why he should not pay compensation to
such accused or to each or any of such accused when there are more than one or, if such
person is not present direct the issue of a summons to him to appear and show cause as
aforesaid.
The Magistrate shall record and consider any cause which such complainant or informant
may show, and if he is satisfied that there was no reasonable ground for making the
accusation, may, for reasons to be recorded, make an order that compensation to such
amount not exceeding the amount of fine he is empowered to impose, as he may
determine, be paid by such complainant or informant to the accused or to each or any of
them.
The Magistrate may, by the order directing payment of the compensation under Sub-
Section (2) further order that, in default of payment, the person ordered to pay such
compensation shall under go simple imprisonment for a period not exceeding thirty days.
When any person is imprisoned under Sub-Section (3), the provisions of sections 68 and 69
of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) shall, so far as may be, apply.
No person who has been directed to pay compensation under this section shall, by reason of
such order, be exempted from any civil or criminal liability in respect of the complaint made
or information given by him:
Provided that any amount paid to an accused person under this section shall be taken into
account in awarding compensation to such person in any subsequent civil suit relating to
the same matter.
A complainant or informant who has been ordered under Sub-Section (2) by a Magistrate of
the second class to pay compensation exceeding one hundred rupees, may appeal from the
order as if such complainant or informant had been convicted on a trial held by such
Magistrate.
When an order for payment of compensation to an accused person is made in a case which
is subject to appeal under Sub-Section (6), the compensation shall not be paid to him
before the period allowed for the presentation of the appeal has elapsed, or, if an appeal is
presented, before the appeal has been decided; and where such order is made in a case
which is not so subject to appeal the compensation shall not be paid before the expiration
of one month from the date of the order.
The provisions of this section apply to summons-cases as well as to warrant cases.
QUESTION 3:- Discuss the provisions of tender of pardon?
SECTION 306-Tender of pardon to accomplice
The purpose of this section is to grant pardon to an accused where a serious offence is
alleged to have been committed by many persons so that with the help of the evidence of
such accused, the offenders may be punished.
The pardon can be granted when the offences are triable by the Court of Session or by a
court of special Judge appointed under the Criminal Law (Amendment) Act 1952 and the
offences punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 7 years or with a more severe
sentence nor exclusively triable by a Court of Session. The provision of this section cannot
be enlarged. Pardon can only be tendered with respect to the categories of offences
mentioned in the section and to none others. The jurisdiction to tender pardon is strictly
limited to the offences mentioned in the section.
The Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Metropolitan Magistrate or the Magistrate of first class
may grant pardon with the only difference that the Chief Judicial Magistrate or a
Metropolitan Magistrate may grant pardon in any case whether they have taken cognizance
of it or not. They may grant pardon at any stage of investigation or inquiry into or trial of
the offence even if the trial is proceeding before the Court of Session. But the Magistrate of
first class can grant pardon only in the cases which he is enquiring or trying and he can
grant pardon only at any stage of the inquiry or trial. A Magistrate of First Class cannot
grant pardon at the stage of the investigation, nor can do so in a case which is not before
him for inquiry or trial.
The only conditions required for granting pardon are that the accused should make a
thorough and complete disclosure of all the facts within his knowledge throwing light upon
the offence or the offences about which he promises to give evidence. The Magistrate
granting pardon has power to add any condition. The Magistrate may make a condition that
if the approver fails to make a full disclosure of the facts, he may be prosecuted.
It is discretionary with the Magistrate to grant pardon. But he should exercise the power in
exceptional circumstances. If no approver is examined as a witness the other accused will
go free, pardon may be granted. When there are a number of witnesses, of fact, the pardon
should not be granted to an accused. In any case no pardon should be granted to the main
offender.
It often happens that the police does not charge sheet one of the accused and examines
him as a witness. The evidence of such a witness is not irrelevant, but such course should
be deprecated.
The Magistrate granting pardon shall explain all the conditions to the accused. He has to
make it clear to the accused that if he does not fulfill the conditions and if he conceals any
material fact or if he tells anything false, he may be tried. The Magistrate shall record his
reasons and should also mention as to whether the pardon was accepted. The Magistrate
has also to supply a copy of this procedure to the accused if asked for. If the manner of
pardon is substantially complied with, though it is not very regularly recorded, the
procedure is legal.
Before an accused can be examined against a co-accused not only that a pardon should be
tendered to him, but it is necessary that he should accept it. If the pardon is not accepted
by a person, his position remains that of an accused. The acceptance of pardon need not be
in writing. It may be evidenced by the conduct. A person can be said to have accepted a
pardon only when he sticks to the conditions imposed.
The Magistrate tendering pardon has to record the reason for granting pardon. The reasons
that the accused is granted pardon so that evidence may be available against the other
accused is a good reason. The giving of the reason is not a condition precedent for granting
a pardon. It is only a matter of procedure and the failure to record reason is only an
irregularity which does not affect the pardon. It has been held that recording of reason is
mandatory provision. If the reasons are not recorded the order of Magistrate can be
quashed.
The expression ‘any person supposed to have been directly or indirectly concerned in or
privy to an offence’ does not necessarily mean a person against whom a charge sheet has
been submitted nor is it necessary that he should know exactly what crime has been
committed. The ground of granting a pardon is not the extent of complicity of a person in
the offence. The fact that the person concerned does not implicate himself to the same
extent as he does others is no bar in granting a pardon.
The pardon granted is not limited to the offences for which the trial is being held, rather it
extends to all the offences which were so connected with the offence for which the pardon
was tendered. The approver on acceptance of the pardon is required to make a complete
disclosure of all the facts within his knowledge bearing upon the offence or offences as to
which he gave evidence. Pardon protects the offender from being prosecuted for the offence
for which pardon is granted.
In some cases pardon once granted and accepted cannot be withdrawn.
If the person to whom pardon is tendered has not been released on bail prior to granting
him pardon, he shall be detained in custody until the termination of the trial. The provision
to keep him in custody is mandatory and neither the Magistrate nor the Judge nor even the
High Court can grant him bail.
Custody, under this section, means a judicial custody. A person who is granted pardon has
not to be sent to police custody. He has to be kept in judicial lock-up.
Even if the pardon has been refused at one stage, a further request can be entertained and
considered only if fresh or additional facts are placed by the parties concerned.
A tender of pardon and its acceptance is a matter entirely between court concerned and the
person to whom it is made. The other person against whom an investigation or enquiry is
going on in connection with the same offence have no right to object to the making the
tender of pardon.
Under the old Code, it was held by the Delhi High Court that the order tendering the pardon
was an administrative order and so it was not revisable. This case was over ruled and the
order was revisable. Under the present law, The order tendering the pardon and order
declining to tender pardon are interlocutory orders and so no revision lies.
There are two ways open to the prosecution to examine a co-accused against the others
without granting him pardon. The public prosecutor may withdraw from the prosecution
against that accused under Section 321, get him discharged and then examine him. The
second course open to the prosecution is to separate the case of that particular accused
from that of the other accused and then examine him in the case against the other accused.
The police carrying investigation may make an accused a witness by giving him assurance
that he would not be prosecuted. A person liable to be summoned under Section 319 is a
competent witness if not summoned as an accused under that Section 55.
The release of the approver on bail by the High Court does neither affect pardon granted to
him nor the trial.
SECTION 307-Power to direct tender of pardon
At any time after commitment of a case, but before judgment is passed, the Court to which
the commitment is made may, with a view to obtaining at the trial the evidence of any
person supposed to have been directly or indirectly concerned in, or privy to, any such
offence, tender a pardon on the same condition to such person.
SECTION 308-Trial of person not complying with conditions of pardon
The prosecution of an approver can be started only on the certificate of the public
prosecutor to the effect that the person has not complied with the conditions of the pardon
by willfully concealing anything essential fact or by giving false evidence. The sole basis for
the prosecution of the approver is the certificate of the public prosecutor.
The provision of this section pre-supposes that the pardon which had been tendered was
accepted and thereafter the approver has willfully concealed anything essential or has given
false evidence. There must be acceptance of the pardon and the person must be examined.
If the pardon has not been accepted, the trial of the approver without certificate is illegal
and it is also illegal to try him with other accused.
The approver may be tried for the offence in respect of which pardon has been tendered, or
the other offence which might have been committed in connection with the same matter
and for giving false evidence.
The trial of a person who has not complied with the condition of the provision must not be
held jointly with other accused of the case, but if the pardon has not been accepted by him,
he may be jointly tried.
The trial for perjury cannot be started without the sanction of the High Court. The High
Court is not bound to accord the sanction in each and every case. The High Court before
granting sanction should consider all the circumstances in the case and decide the main
question whether the previous statement or the confession was true and voluntary. If it is
of opinion that the previous statement and confession was true, the sanction may be
accorded. If the statement at the time of pardon is not true, the inference may be that the
statement was obtained by force and sanction is not to be granted.
For the trial of an approver only the sanction of the High Court is needed. Neither an
enquiry under Section 340 nor a complaint by the Court under Section 195 is needed. The
approver shall be tried on the charge-sheet submitted by the police.
At the trial of the approver, the statement at the time of accepting the pardon, the
statement made by the approver under section 164 after accepting the pardon and the
statement at the committal proceeding and at the trial shall be relevant against the accused
at his trial for perjury. The statement to be admissible under this section should be made
after the acceptance of the pardon.
The accused has a right to plead at the trial that he fulfilled the conditions of the pardon
and if he so pleads, the burden to prove that he did not comply with the pardon either by
willful concealment of essential fact or giving false evidence, lies on the prosecution.
A Sessions Judge or Magistrate trying an approver has to ask the approver whether he
pleads that he had complied with the conditions of the pardon. The Judge has to put this
question before he examines the witnesses; failure to follow this procedure would vitiate
the trial. Sub-sections (4) and (5) of Section 308 make it clear that in the trial of an
approver who has forfeited the pardon, the question whether he pleads that the conditions
of pardon have been complied with by him has to be first decided before he is tried for
original offence. It is imperative for the Sessions Courts to ask the accused whether he
pleads that the conditions of pardon have been complied with before the charge for the
original offence is read out. If he so pleads, a clear finding on the question of compliance or
non-compliance of the conditions of pardon would be condition precedent to his protection
for the original offence after he forfeits his pardon.
The Court has power to record the plea of the approver and for the sake of justice, it has to
record it in full.
The court after recording the plea of the approver will proceed with the trial, but before
passing any judgment, it has to decide whether or not the approver has complied with the
conditions of the pardon.
If the Court comes to the conclusion that the prosecution could not prove that the approver
did not comply with the conditions of the pardon, it has to pass a judgment of acquittal.
Only when the finding is against the approver, he may convict the accused.
Question4. What do you mean by FIR? In what circumstances a

Magistrate can make an order for investigation of an offence? OR
What are the ingredient of FIR? What are the effects of delay in ling
FIR?
INTRODCTION:-First information report and investigation plays an important role in

administering of criminal justice. It is expected that it should be recorded with utmost care
and caution. It should be recorded without any delay so that manipulation of facts does not
arise. FIR & Investigation determines that a prima facie case exist against the accused or
not. Sections 154 of Cr.P.C.-1973 described in detail about FIR, but fi word is not as such
written in tis section.
ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF F.I.R.
Although the definition of FIR is no given in the Cr.P.C. however it may be as follows:-
i) It is information which is given at the first stage to the Police Officer In- charge
of the Police station.
ii) Information must relate to a cognizable offence.
iii) It is on the basis of this information that investigation into the offence
commences.
v) The FIR could be in any type i.e. written or oral. It can also be given on
telephone. Sunil v/s State of MP, 1997.
It is essential that a detailed explanation of the happening should be given in FIR. In a case
of Navratan Mahanto v/s State of Bihar-1980, the court observed that the prosecution
cannot be dismissed merely on the basis that FIR does not contains the complete
explanation of happening as only gist of the happening in factual position needs to be
mentioned.
Section 154 says- As soon as the Officer-in-charge receives information of commission of a

cognizable offence entry to this effect shall & immediately be made in the Register
maintained for this purpose without delay.
If any information is given orally, it should be recorded and then to read and obtained the
signature of the person giving information.
In a case of State of A.P v/s P. Ramulu, 1993, the court observed that FIR cannot be
refused to be recorded on the ground that the offence was committed not within the
jurisdiction.
There should be no delay in registering FIR (Gnash Bhawan Pated v/s State of Maharashtra,
1979.).
CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN MAGISTRATE ORDERS FOR INVESTIGATION: – Investigation

begins with the FIR. If the FIR is regarding any non-cognizable offence then such
information shall be recorded in the register maintained for this purpose and the person
who is giving the information will be referred to the Magistrate. In other words investigation
cannot be done without the order of the Magistrate.
Section 155 of the Code of criminal procedure provides that:-
1. No Police Officer shall investigate a Non-cognizable case without the order of the
Magistrate having power to try such case or commit the case for trial.
2. Any Police officer receiving such order may exercise the same powers in respect of the
investigation (except the power to arrest without warrant) as an Officer–in-charge of a
police station may exercise in cognizable case.
3. Where a case relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable, the
same shall be deemed to be a cognizable case, notwithstanding that the other offences are
non-cognizable.
4. An investigation in a non-cognizable offence made under the order of Magistrate is

treated as in investigation under chapter-XII and the report will be submitted to the
Magistrate under section 173(2).
In cases of cognizable Offences, there is no need of the orders of the Magistrate to begin
the investigation. However it has also been made clear by the Supreme Court a new
provision under the code under section 155(4) which incorporates a view of Supreme Court
that where a case relates to two or more offences of which at least one is cognizable the
case shall be deemed to be a cognizable case, in-spite of the fact that other offences are
non-cognizable, where there are both cognizable and non-cognizable offences mixed
together the Police Officer can investigate even if there is single cognizable offence.
https://www.lawordo.com/
5. Discuss the provisions relating to Information to the police and their

powers to investigate.
INTRODUCTION: – Section 154 speaks of information relating to the commission of a

cognizable offence given to an officer-in-charge of a Police Station. This section has a three-
fold object that to inform the District Magistrate and Supdtt. Of Police who are responsible
for maintaining peace and safety of the District. It is also pertinent to brought it in the
notice of judicial officers before whom the case is ultimately tried. And the most important
to safeguard the accused against subsequent variations or additions.
1. INFORMATION IN CONIZABE CASES:- Every information relating to the commission of

a cognizable offence if given orally to an officer-in-charge of a Police Station, shall be
reduced to writing by him or under his direction and be read over to the informant. Every
such information, whether given in writing or reduced to writing as aforesaid, shall be
signed by the person giving it. The officers receiving make the entries of the substance
thereof in the prescribed Register available with him.
2. Copy of the Information as recorded shall be given forthwith free of cost to the
informant.
3. Refusal to record the information:- If any officer-in-charge of police station refuses to

record the information the informant may send to substance of such information to the
Supdtt. Of Police concern who further on his satisfaction will investigate the case himself or
direct to his subordinate.
4. The information given to Police Office and reduced to writing as required under the
section is called FIR. When any information discosing cognizable offence is laid before the
Officer I/c of a Police Station, he has no option but to register the case of that base as held
in State of Haryana v/s Ch.Bhajan Lal-1992.In a case of Gurpreet Singh v/s State of
Punjab-2006:- It was held that merely non-disclosure of the names of witnesses in the daily
diary as well as mortuary register cannot affect the prosecution of case.
Case State of A.P. v/s V.V. Panduranga Rao-2009: It was held that statement given on
telephone is to be treated as FIR because cryptic telephonic message of cognizable offence
received by Police would not constitute FIR. The mere fact that the telephonic message was
first in point of time does not by itself clothe it with character of FIR.
5. Where FIR is lodged and what Object:- Generally the information about the offence
committed is given to the Police Station of the place concern, but it does not mean that it
cannot be lodged elsewhere. In a case of Punati Raube v/s State of A.P.-1993: The police
constable refused to record the compalaint on the ground that the said police station had no
territorial jurisdiction over the place of crime. Any lack of territorial jurisdiction could not
have prevented the constable from recording information about the cognizable offence and
forwarding the same to concern police station.
6. The object of FIR: the main object of the FIR is to complain of any of the offence to a
Police officer so that criminal law could be applied. Where the FIR was found o have been
written after the inquest report was prepared the court held that it has lost its authenticity
in the case of Balaka Singh v/s State of Punjab-1975.
7. IMPORTANCE OF FIR:- On consideration its important from every angle it is noticed

that FIR is a very important from the occurrence of an offence. It should be given
immediately after the offence is committed. The delay in giving information is viewed with
grave suspicion as held in the case of Modivalappa -1966. There is no need to give the
names of witnesses or other minute detail.
8. Duty to register FIR:- In a case of Rajender Singh Katoch v/s Chandigarh

Administration & Others-2008, that although the officer-in-charge of Police station is legally
bound to register a FIR in term of sec.154. It was also held in Aleque Padamsee and Others
v/s Union of India-2007:- that in case of inaction of police officials in registering FIR person
aggrieved can adopt modalities contained in sec.190 read with 200 Cr.P.C by laying
complaint before the magistrate concern to take cognizance of offence.
9. Delay in filing FIR: – Delay in giving FIR can be condoned if there is satisfactory
explanation as held in Apren jospeh v/s State of Kerla-1973.
Whether the delay is so long as to throw a cloud of suspicion on deeds of the
prosecution case must be depend upon a variety of actors, Case Ram Jog v/s State of UP-
1974.
10. Delay in lodging FIR in rape cases:- In State Of Himachal Pradesh v/s Shreekant
Shekari-2004: That mere delay in lodging FIR does not anyway render prosecution version
brittle.
11. Powers to investigate:-Under section156 the police is empowered to investigate into a

cognizable offence without order of a Magistrate or without a formal first information report.
If the police do not investigate the Magistrate can order for the investigation as in case of
Abhyanand Jha v/s Dinesh Chandra-1968. Sec. 156(2) provides that no proceeding of a
Police Officer in any such case shall at any stage be called in question on the ground that
the case was one which such officer was not empowered under this sec. to investigate, case
Hari Singh v/s State of UP-2006. Sec.156(3) Any magistrate is empowered under sec.190
may order such an investigation , case Bateshwar Singh v/s State of Bihar-1992.
6. Brief the Jurisdiction of criminal Courts in inquiries &Trials. OR “Every

offence shall ordinarily be inquired and tried by court within the local
limits of whose jurisdiction It was committed.” Explain the statement
and state its exception.
INTRODUCTION: – A Magistrate within whose local jurisdiction the offence is committed is

competent to take cognizance and to try the case. The jurisdiction of the Magistrate does
not come to an end by transfer of the locality, where the crime was committed to another
district. The court having jurisdiction to try the offences committed in pursuance of the
conspiracy can try the offence of conspiracy even if it was committed outside its jurisdiction
under section 177.
It makes it clear that an offence shall be inquired and tried by a court within the
local limits of whose jurisdiction the offence was committed. B.Patnaik v/s Smt.Binand,
1970, it was held that court decided that offences shall be tried by a court within the local
limits of whose jurisdiction the offence was committed.
1. Place of inquiry or trial in certain matters:- Sec.178, when it is uncertain in which of

several local areas an offences was committed. The offence is committed partly in one local
area and partly in another. Where an offence is continuing one and continues to be
committed in more local areas than one. Then it may be inquired or tried by a court having
jurisdiction over any of such local areas. State of M.P. v/s K.P.Ghiyara-1957.
2. Offence triable where act is done:- An act is an offence by reason of anything which
has been done and of a consequence which has ensued the offence may be inquired into or
tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction such thing has been done or such
consequence has ensued under sec. 179. Case Lal chand v/s State -1961is suitable example
a gang was created for dacoity in a district but was committed in another district, it was
decided that the case can be tried by the court of any of the two districts.
3. Place of trial act is offence by reason of relation to other offence:- When an act is an
offence by reason of its to any other act which is also an offence or which would be an
offence if the door were capable of committing an offence the offence which is done first
may be inquired into or tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction either act was done,
under sec.180. Munna Lal v/s State of Rajasthan-1964: committing theft and receiving
stolen property, such matter can be tried by a court of any of the two places.
4. Place of trial in case of certain offences:-Any offence of being a thug or murder

committed by a thug of dacoity, of dacoity with murder of belonging to a gang of dacoits or
of escaping from custody may be inquired into or tried by a Court within whose local
jurisdiction the offence was committed or the accused person is found. Under sec.181.
Jaswant Singh v/s Emperor, 1918, in a matter of abduction of married woman for the
purpose of unlawful intercourse, it can be tried that court within whose local jurisdiction the
woman was detained.
5. Offences committed by Letters etc:- Any offence which includes cheating may if the
deception is practiced by means of letters o telecommunication message be inquired into or
tried by any court within whose local jurisdiction such letters or messages were sent or
were received and may offence of cheating and dishonesty including delivery of property
may be inquired into or tried by a court within whose local jurisdiction the property was
delivered by the person deceived or was received by the accused person under sec.182.
Tekumalla Muneiah v/s C.B.Ammanamma, 1991: it was a case of bigamy the court held the
complainant could be entertained by the court having territorial jurisdiction over that place.
6. Offence committed on journey or voyage:- When an offence is committed while the

person by or against whom or the thing in respect of which the offence is committed is in
the course of performing a journey or voyage the offence may be inquired into or tried by a
court through or into whose local jurisdiction that person or thing passed in the course of
that journey or voyage, u/sec.183.
7. Place of trial for offences triable together:- Sec.184 says, where the offence committed
by any person are such that he may be charged with and tried at one trial for each such
offence by virtue of the provisions of seec.219 or sec.220 or sec.221. The offence or
offences committed by several persons are such that they may be charged with and tried
together by virtue of the provision of sec.223.Case: Pursottam Dalmiya v/s State of
W.B.-1961.
8. Offences Committed Outside India:- When offences is committed outside India by a

citizen of India, whether on the high seas or elsewhere or by a person not being such
citizen on any ship or aircraft registered in India, he may be dealt with in respect of such
offence as if it had been committed at any place in India at which he may be found.
7. DISCUSS THE JOINDER OF CHARGES UNDER CODE OF CRIMINAL

PROCEDURE.
INTRODUCTION:- The object of the rule embodied in the sec. 218 of Cr. P. C., is to ensure
a fair trial and to see that the accused is not bewildered or perplex to confuse by having
been asked to defend several unconnected charges or distinct offences lumped together in
one charge or in separate charges. We will read the rules relating to joinder of charges
described in different part of this section. There is no exception to the rule that there should
be separate charge for each offence. The detail study of this section is as under:-
DEFINITION: – For every distinct offence of which any person is accused there shall be a
separate charge and every charge shall be tried separately. Where the accused person by
an application in writing, so desires and the Magistrate is of opinion that such person is not
likely to be prejudiced thereby, Magistrate may try together all or any number of the
charges famed against such person.
1. Effect of Contravention of Sec.218:- The effect of the contravention of the provisions of

this sec. has been considered by the Supreme Court in following number of cases:- Sushil
Kumar v/s Joy Shankar-1971: It was held that charges under 408 and 477A of IPC could be
tried together. In this case several persons accused on several items of embezzlement were
tried jointly. There was no failure of justice in consequence of the joinder of charges had
occurred. In V.N. KAMDAR v/s DELHI MUNICIPALITY-1973: It was held, “that the provisions
of sec. 218 to 224 would indicate that separate charge and separate trial for such distinct
offence is the normal rule and joint trial is an exception when the accused have committed
separate offence.”
2. Failure to Explain injuries on the accused:- When the prosecution fails to explain
satisfactorily the injuries sustained by the accused there are number of judicial
pronouncements on this point. Case State of Gujrat v/s Bai Fatima-1975: It was held that
the accused had inflicted the injuries on the members of the prosecution party in exercise of
the right of self-defence.
3. Three offences of the same kind within year may be charged together:- under section
219 of Cr. P. C. when a person is accused of more offences than one of the same kind
committed within the space of twelve months from the first to the last of such offences, he
may be charged with and tried at one trial for any number of them not exceeding three.
Provisions of section are only enabling provisions, it applies where offences are of the same
kind but it does not apply where offences are not of the same kind such as criminal breach
of trust and falsification of accounts. Rahmat v/s State of U. P.-1980.
4. Trial for than one offence:- If in one series of Acts so connected together as to form
the same transaction more offences than one are committed by the same person, he may
be charged with and tried at one trial for every such offence as provided under section,220
of the Cr. P.C. Case Krishna Murthy v/s Abdu Subhan- 1965. Case of Kanshiram v/s
Jhunjhunwala-1935, with the same it was necessary to ascertain whether they are so
connected together as to constitute a whole which can properly be described as a
transaction.
5. Where it is doubtful what offence has been committed: – Sec.221 provides for the
cases where it is doubtful what offence has been committed. It applies to the cases in which
the facts are not doubtful but the application of law to the facts is doubtful as held in a case
of Abdul Hamid -1935. This sec. applies where the doubt is about the nature of the offence
and not about the facts as held in case Jatinder Kumar v/s State of Delhi-1992.
6. When the offence proved included in offence charged: – Sec.222 considered the
conviction of minor offence included in the offence charged in either of two cases, where the
offence charged consists of several particulars and combination is proved but the remaining
particulars are not proved as held in Maung Ba v/s the King-1938. And where the facts are
proved which reduce the offence charged to a minor offence as held in case of, Emperor
v/sAbdul Wahab-1945.
7. What persons may be charged jointly:- Under sec.223 joint trail of several persons is
permissible and applies only to trials and not to inquires. A joint trial of several persons
under this section is not vitiated merely by the facts that at the end of the trial the facts
found happen to be different from those on the basis of which the charges were originally
framed as held in case of Trilokchand v/s Rex-1949. It was also held in case of A.R.Autulay
v/s R.S.Nayak-1988.
8. Withdrawal of remaining charges on conviction on one of several charges: – When a

charge containing more heads than one is framed against the same person and when a
conviction has been had on one or more of them, the complainant or the Officer conducting
the prosecution may with the consent of the Court withdraw the remaining charge or
charges. The court of its own accord may stay the inquiry into or trial of such charges.
Court may proceed with the inquiry into or trial of the charge or charges so withdrawn.
8. Discuss the provisions of trail before a Court of Session.
INTRODUCTION: – The procedure of trial of offences before court has been described in
section 225 to sec. 237 of the Criminal Procedure Code-1973. Here it is important that any
matter does not come directly for trial before the Court of Sessions. Such matter is
committed for trial to Court of Session. Any matter is committed to Court of Session when
it has the exclusive jurisdiction to try such offence.
1. CONDUCTION OF TRIAL:- In every trial before a Court of Session, the

prosecution shall be conducted by a Public Prosecutor as laid down in sec.225 of the code.
2. OPENING THE CASE FOR PROSECUTION:- When the accused appears or

brought by before the Court in pursuance of a commitment of the case under section 209
the prosecutor shall open his case by describing the charge brought against the accused
and stating by what evidence he purposes to prove the guilt of the accused under sec. 226
of Cr. P. C. case of Hukam Singh v/s State of Rajasthan-2001.
3. DISCHARGE: – If upon the consideration of the record of the case and the
documents submitted therewith and after hearing the submission of the accused and the
prosecution in this behalf, the Judge considers that there is not sufficient ground for
proceeding against the accused he shall discharge the accused and record his reasons for
doing so. As held in case of T.V.Sharma v/s R.Meeriah-1980. It is called charge arguments;
court has to consider the complete case carefully before giving order to discharge State of
J&K v/s Romeshchandra-1997. These are the provisions of sec.227.
4. Framing of charge: – While framing charges court shall only see that there is a
prima facie case against accused or not. At this juncture there is no need for praising
witnesses as held in case of State of M.P. v/s S.B. Johri-2000. Where the judge frames any
charge, the charge shall be read and explained to the accused and accused shall be asked
whether he pleads guilty of the offence charged or claims to be tried as provided in section
228 of Cr. P.C.
5. Conviction on Plea of Guilty: – If the accused pleads guilty the judge shall
record the plea and may in his discretion convict him thereon. The plea of guilty only
amounts to an admission that the accused committed the acts alleged against him. It was
held in case of Tyron Nazarath v/s State of Maharashtra-1989. This is more so in case
persons tried jointly when some plead guilty and the others claim to be tried, case of Bantra
Kunjana-1960. These are provisions available in sec. 229 of Cr.P.C.
6. Date for Prosecution Evidence:- If the accused refuses to plead or does not
plead or claims to be tried or is not convicted under sec.229, the Judge shall fix a date for
the examination of witnesses and may on the application of the prosecution issue any
process for compelling the attendance of any witness or the production of any document or
other thing. Case Mukipad Mandal v/s Abdul Jabbar-1973, it is the duty of court to take all
necessary steps to compel the attendance of witnesses. The accused cannot be acquitted on
the ground of failure of the witnesses to appear before the court, under sec. 230.
7. Evidence for Prosecution:- On the date fixed, the judge shall proceed to take all
such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution sec.231. when any witness
appears before the court there shall be no delay as possible in his examination but if any
delay happens in the examination of any witness the merely on this ground the prosecution
matter cannot be suspended case of Bunty urf Guddu v/s State of M.P-2004.
8. Acquittal: – If after taking the evidence for the prosecution examining the
accused and hearing the prosecution and he defence on the point the Judge considers that
there is no evidence that the accused committed the offence the judge shall record an order
of acquittal under sec. 232. The accused can either be convicted or acquittal but not
discharged.
9. Entering Upon Defence :- Where th accused is not acquitted under sec.232 he

shall be called upon to enter on his defence and adduce any evidence he may have in
support thereof. It the accused puts in any written statement the judge shall file it with the
record. If the accuse applies for the issue of any process for compelling the attendance of
any witness or production of any document or thing the judge shall issue such person
unless he considers such application for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating
the ends of justice. Case State of MP v/s Badri Yadav-2006. These are the provisions in
sec.233.
10. Arguments:- When the examination of witnesses for the defence is complete the
prosecutor shall sum up his case and accused shall be entitled to reply. During his process
where any point of law is raised by the accused the prosecutions mazy with the permission
of judge make his submissions with regard to such point of law under sec. 234. It is called
arguments.
11. Judgment:-After hearing both the parties the judge shall give a judgment in the
case under sec.235.Case:Alluddin Mian Sharif Mian v/s State of Bihar-1989.
12. Previous Conviction: – If the accused is charge of previous conviction and the
accused does not admit that then judge may take evidence in respect of the alleged
previous conviction and record a finding thereon under sec. 236.
13. Procedure in cases instituted under Sec. 199:-Sec.237 of the code provides the
procedure for trial of such matters which have been instituted under sec.199 (2). Sec.199
(2) provides for prosecution of defamation matters. If any matters of defamation is alleged
to have been committed against the President of India, Vice-President, Governor of State,
Administrator of UT, Minister of Union or State or Any other Public servant. If during trial
court finds scope of acquittal he may pass such orders.
9. For every distinct offence of which any person is accused there shall
be a separate charge and every such charge shall be tried separately.
Explain are there any exceptions to this rule, if so what?
INTRODUCTION:- Provisions relating to charge are aimed at giving complete information to

the accused about the offence of which he is being charged. It gives the accurate precise
information about the accusations made against him. Every charge shall state the offence
with which the accused is charged. The charge shall be written in the language of the Court.
The language of the charge should be specific and clear.
WHAT IS CHARGE: – Sec.2 (b) of Cr.P.C.-1973 provides the definition of charge but it is
neither definition as per dictionary meaning nor it is directing any meaning. It only says
that, “Charge induces any head of charge when the charge contains more heads than one.”
Charge is such a written statement of the information of offence against the accused person
which contains the grounds of charge along-with time, place, person and things in relation
to which offence is committed. The charge is a precise formulation of the specific accusation
of an offence against the accused person. Accused prepares his defences on the basis of it.
Components of Charge:- Sec.211 says that:-
1. Every charge shall state the offence with which the accused is charged.
2. If the law which creates the offence gives it any specific name, the same may be
described by that name, like theft, robbery, dacoity or murder etc.
3. If law does not give any specific name so much of the definition of the offence must be
stated for giving the notice to accused.
4. The Law and section of the law against which the offence is 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 is fulfilled.
6. The charge shall be written in the language of the court. Case of Krishan v/s State of
Kerla-1958.The court said that charge should be in Court’s language.
7. The previous conviction if any of the accused must be stated in the charge i.e. place,
date and the fact of the offence.
According to Sec. 212:- Particulars as to time place and person:-
1. The time of commission of the offence be given in the charge.
2. The place of commission of the offence may also be recorded in charge.
3. The person against whom or thing in respect of which it was committed.
4. The manner of committing offence must be stated in the charge u/s 213.
5. The words must be of sense of law under which offence is punishable u/s214.
Effect of Errors: – Section 215 of the code says that there should be no error in stating
either the offence or the particulars required to be stated in the charge, there should also
be no omission to state the offence or those particulars which at any stage of the case as
material unless the accused was in fact misled by such error or omission which may results
the failure of justice. Then such charge shall be considered faulty and the trial on the basis
of such charge shall also be faulty.
Court May alter the charge: Under sec.216, any court may alter or add to any charge at any
time before the judgment is pronounced.
Recall of Witnesses when charge altered:- under section 217, whenever the charge is
altered or added to by the Court after the commencement of the trial the prosecutor and
the accused shall be allowed to recall or re-summoned and examine the alteration and
addition any witness who may have been examined.
Separate charges for distinct offence: – The object of sec.218 is to ensure a fair trial and to
see that the accused is not bewildered by having been asked to defend several unconnected
charges or distinct offences lumped together in one charge, case of Aftab Ahmad Khan v/s
State of Hydrabad-1954.
Same offences of same kind within one year may be charged together: – sec. 219 provides
that offences punishable under sec.379 and 380 IPC shall be deemed to be offences of the
same kind. Criminal breach of trust and falsification of accounts, when the offence is
committed by a single accused and is not applicable where several persons are tried jointly.
Trial for than one offence:- Sec.220 provides If in one series of acts so connected together
as to form the same transaction, more offences than one are committed by the same
person, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for every such offence. Case State of
Biahar v/s Simranjit Singh-1987.
Framing of charge where it is doubtful what offence has been committed:- sec.221 of the
code provides for the framing of charge in those matters where there is doubt of what
offence has been committed. In such matters, charge shall be framed as follows:-
All offences committed as a result of the nature of Act.
All or any of such offences charged in the alternative with having committed some one of
the said offences. Goverdhan v/s Kanilal-1953.
When offence proved included in offences charged:- When a person is charged with an
offence consisting of several particulars or an offence and facts are proved which reduce it
to a minor will be convicted of the minor, case of State of Maharashtra v/s Rajendra
Jawanmal Gandhi-1997, Sangarobina Sreenu v/s State of A.P.-1997. These are the
provisions of Sec.222 of the code.
Withdrawal of remaining charges on conviction on one of several charges:- Sec.224 of the

code says that when a charge containing more heads than one is framed against he same
person and when a conviction has been had one or more of them the applicant or
prosecution with the consent of court withdraw the remaining charges or court of its own
accord may stay the inquiry or trial.
10. What do you mean by Judgment? What are the contents of

judgment? Discuss the powers of High court to con rm death
sentence?
INTROUDCTION: – After hearing both the parties the Judge give a judgment in the case.
The judgement in every trial in any criminal court of its own jurisdiction shall be pronounced
in the open court by the presiding officer immediately after the termination of the trial or at
some subsequent time of which notice shall be given to the parties or their pleaders.
1. Section 353 of the cr. procedure code-1973 provides:-The judgment in every trial in any
criminal court in its own jurisdiction shall be pronounced in open court by the presiding
officer immediately after the termination of the trial or at some subsequent time of which
notice shall be given to the parties or their pleaders. Case Anthony v/s State-1993. It was
also held in a case of Yelchuri Manohar v/s State of A.P-2005, that electronic media cannot
provide any guiding factors.
2. Language and contents of Judgment: – That every judgment shall be written in the
language of the Court. It may also contain the point or points for determination, the
decision thereon and the reasons for the decision, as provided in sec. 354 of the code. Case
of Ram Bali v/s State of U.P. -2004. The language and the contents of the judgment must b
self-contained and must also show that the court has applied its mind to the facts and the
evidence, as held in case of Niranjan V/s State -1978. Failure to signing of judgment at the
time of pronouncing it is only a procedural irregularity curable as per instructions provided
in the code.
3. Judgment of Metropolitan Magistrate: – That instead of recording a judgment in the

manner provided a metropolitan magistrate shall record the serial number of the case, the
date of commission of the offence along-with the name of the complainant. The name of
the accused person his parentage and residence mentioning the plea and examination of
accused. The date of final order may also be recorded as provisions laid down in sec.355.
4. Order for notifying address of previously convicted offender: – Sec. 356 of the code
provides that, when any having been convicted by a court in India of an offence punishable.
If such conviction is set aside on appeal or otherwise such order shall become void. State
Govt., can make rules to carry out the provisions relating to the notification of residence.
5. Order to pay compensation:-The quantum of compensation is to be determined by taking

into consideration the nature of the crime, injury suffered and the capacity of the convict to
pay in case of Manish Jalan v/s State of Karnatka-2007. These are the provisions of the
section 357.
6. Scheme for compensation to victim:-In every state with the coordination with the central
Govt., shall prepare a scheme for providing funds for the purpose of compensation to the
victim or his dependents who have suffered loss or injury as a result of the crime and who
require rehabilitation under sec.357A.
7. Compensation to persons groundlessly arrested: – Sec. 358 provides that whenever any
person causes a police officer to arrest another person if it appears to the Magistrate by
whom the case is heard that there was no sufficient ground of causing such arrest. The
Magistrate may award such compensation not exceeding 1000/- rupees as held in case of
Parmod Kumar v/s Golekha1986.
8. Order to pay costs in non-cognizable cases: – Sec.359 says that whenever any complaint
of a non-cognizable offence is made to a court, the court if it convicts the accused can order
to pay the penalty along-with cost incurred by the complainant and in case of default of
payment the accused can sentence simple imprisonment for a period not exceeding 30
days.
9. Order to release on probation of good conduct after admonition:-Sec.360 says that this
section is a piece of beneficent legislation. It applies only to first offenders. It enables the
court under certain circumstances to release the accused who has been convicted on
probation of good conduct as in a case of Ved Parkash v/s State of Haryana-1981.
10. Special reasons to be recorded in certain cases: – Where in any case the court could
have dealt with an accused person under the provisions of offenders Act a youthful offender
may tried by any other law for the time being in force for the treatment training or
rehabilitation of youthful offenders as held in case of Nanna v/s State of Rajasthan-1989,
under sec. 361.
11. Court not to alter Judgment:- According to section 362 of the code that any other law
for the time being in force no court when it has signed its judgment or final order disposing
of a case shall alter or review the same except to correct a clerical or arithmetical error,
case of Naresh & others v/s State of U.P.-1981.
12. Copy of the judgment to be given to the accused and other persons: – Section 363 says
that a copy of the judgment shall immediately after the pronouncement of the judgment be
given to him free of cost, as held in case of Ladli Parsad Zutsi-1932.
13. Judgment when to be translated: – Sec.364 provides that the original judgment shall be
filed with the record of proceedings and where the original is recorded in different language
from that of court and so requires it may be translated in to the language of the Court.
14. Court of Session to send copy of finding and sentence to District Magistrate: – In the
case tried by the court of session or a CJM the court or such magistrate as the case may be
shall forward a copy of its or his finding and sentence if any to the District Magistrate as
said in sec. 365 of the code.
14 Submission of death sentences for confirmation:-Sec.366When a Court of Session

passes a sentence of death the proceedings shall be submitted to H/C, it cannot be
executed unless it is confirmed by H/C. Sec.371 procedure laid down that the Proper officer
without delay after the order of confirmation or other order has been made by H/C send a
copy of the order under seal of H/C duly attested to S.Court
11. Examine the law relating to appeal in criminal case. Make a

difference between Appeal & Revision in criminal cases.
INTRODUCTION:-Appeal is an important remedy for person’s dissatisfied from judgment

finding and orders of the trial court. Under section 372 of the Cr.P.C., it is provided that
relation to appeal it is necessary to know that no appeal shall lie from any judgment or
order of a criminal court except as provided by this code or any other law for time being in
force, case Garikapati v/s Subhash coudhari-1957. However the provisions regarding
making an appeal are the following:-
1. Appeal from orders requiring security or refusal to accept or rejecting surety for keeping
peace or good behavior: – Any person who has been ordered to give security for keeping
the peace or for good behavior or who is aggrieved by any order refusing to accept or
rejecting a surety on the basis of sec.373.
2. Appeals from Convictions: – According to section 374 of code that any person convicted
on a trial by a H/C in its extraordinary original criminal jurisdiction may appeal to Supreme
Court similar any person convicted by session judge or on a trial held by any other court
which sentence or imprisonment is more than 7 years may appeal to High court. Case
Panchi v/s State of U.P.-1998, In C.Gopinathan v/s State of Kerala-1991
3. Appeal by State against sentence: – Under sec.377, the state Government may in any
case of conviction on a trial held by any court other than a H/C direct the Public Prosecutor
to present an appeal against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy to Court of
Session if the sentence is passed by the Magistrate or to the H/C if the sentence is passed
by any other Court. When an appeal is filed against the sentence on the ground of its
inadequacy court shall not enhance the sentence except after giving to the accused a
reasonable opportunity of sowing cause against such enhancement. Case of Nadir Khan v/s
State-1976.
4. Appeal in case of Acquittal :- In an appeal against acquittal under sec.378 the H/C has
full power to review at large the evidence on which the acquittal is based and to reach the
conclusion that the order of acquittal should be reversed as held in case of Mohandas v/s
State of MP-1973, but exercising his power the H/C should give proper weight and
consideration to the view of the trial judge as to the credibility of witnesses, presumption of
innocence in favour of the accused. And a right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt.
It was also held in State of U.P. v/s Gambir Singh-2005 case of appeal against acquittal if
on same evidence two views are possible, the one in favour of accused must be preferred.
During the hearing of appeal from the order of acquittal it should be taken into
consideration that there is no miscarriage of justice, case Allahrakha K. Mansuri v/s State of
Gujrat-2002. The order of acquittal cannot be dismissed merely on the ground that a
second approach could have been applied in the case and it means that the accused could
have been convicted on considering another view a case of Chandra Singh v/s State of
Gujrat-2002.
5. Appeal against conviction by H/C in certain cases :-Where an H/C has on appeal
reversed an order of manifest on record of acquittal of an accused person and convicted
him and sentenced him to death or to imprisonment for life or to imprisonment for a term
of ten years or more, he may appeal to the Supreme Court under sec. 379.
6. Special right of appeal in certain cases:- In Shingara Singh v/s State of Haryana-2004,
when more persons than one are convicted in one trial and an appealable judgment or
order has been passed in respect of any of such persons, under section 380.
7. Appeal to court of session how heard:- Appeal to the court of session shall be heard by
the sessions judges or by ASJ u/s 381.
8. Petition of appeal:-Every appeal shall be made in the form of a petition in writing

presented by the appellant or his pleader u/s 382.

12. DIFFERENCE BETWEEN APPEAL & REVISION

APPEAL
1. Any person convicted on a trail held by H/C may appeal to S/C.
2. Any person convicted on a trial by a Session judge or on a trial held by any other court
for more than 7 years may appeal to the High Court
3. Any person convicted on a trial held by metropolitan Magistrate or Magistrate Ist. Class
may appeal to Session Judge.
4. If the appellant is in jail he present his petition of appeal through Officer I/c jail.
5. Pending an appeal by accused person the appellate court shall suspend the execution of
order of sentence & if he is in confinement he be released on bail.
REVISION
1. The correctness, legality or proprietary of any finding sentence or order of any lower
court.
2. The regularity of any proceedings of such court.
3. The powers of revision cannot be used through interlocutory orders.
4. During the hearing of Revision argue of the person applying for revision should be
considered seriously even though it they are too brief. Case Pal George v/s state-02.
13. What is bail? State the provisions of Bail under Cr.P.C. Can a person
get order to be released on Bail without judicial or Police custody? Refer
case law.
INTRODUCTION:-It is travesty of justice that many poor accused i.e. ‘little Indians’ are
forced into long cellular servitude for little offences because the bail procedure is beyond
their meagre means and trails don’t commence and even if they do, they never conclude.
Our bail system suffers from a property oriented approach which means to proceed on the
erroneous assumption that risk of monetary loss is the only deterrent against fleeing from
justice.
What is bail?-When any person who is accused of any offence other than non-bailable
offence, he shall be released on bail under sec.436 of the code provided he has been
arrested or detained without warrant by an Officer I/C of Police station or he appears or is
brought before a court and he must be prepared any time whine in the custody or at any
stage of the proceeding before a court.
However the following are the provisions of getting Bail under Cr.P.C. Offences can be
classified into two classes on the basis of bail:-
i) Bailable offences: – Bailable offences are of general nature and in these

offences it is right of accused to be released on bail. Sec.436 of Cr.P.C. pertains to Bailable
offences.
ii) ii) Non-Bailable offences: – These offences are of severe nature and bail cannot
be claimed as right in them. In such cases bail depends upon the discretion of the court.
Sec. 437 relates to Non-bailable offences.
1. Grant of Bail in Non-bailable offences: – Sec. 437 provides that when any person
accused of or suspected of commission of any non bailable offence is arrested or detained
without warrant by an Officer I/C of a Police station or appears or is brought before a court
other than the High Court or court of Session he may be released on bail. Thus section 437
empowered a Magistrate to take bail in non bailable offences. The provision of this makes it
clear that bail in non bailable offences depends upon the discretion of the court.
i) When bail shall be granted: – sec.437 (1) lays down two situation in which bail
shall not be granted by magistrate:1) reasonable grounds for believing that he has been
guilty of offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life. 2. When offence is
cognizable and he had been convicted with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for
7 years or more or he has been convicted on two or more occasion.
ii) There are exceptions to receive bail:- this section also provided with few
exceptions where magistrate can receive bail in following cases:-
a) Where the accused is under the age of 16 years.
b) If she is a woman.
c) Sick or infirm
Thus in the above cases the bail application can be accepted even though the accused in
guilty of offence punishable with death or imprisonment for life or has been convicted
earlier. Case Venkataramanappa v/s State of Karnatka-1992.
Conditions for Bail:- Under sec. 437(3) that where a person accused or suspected of the
commission of an offence punishable with imprisonment which may extend to 7 years or
more or for an offence, abetment of or conspiracy or attempt to commit any such offence
is released on bail, the court may impose any condition which the court considers
necessary, as in the case of Gurbaksh Singh v/s State of Punjab-1980:-
· In order to ensure that such person shall attend in accordance with the
conditions of the bond executed under this chapter.
· That such person shall not commit an offence similar to an offence of which he
is accused or suspected.
· That otherwise in the interest of Justice.
Can a person get order to be released on Bail without judicial or Police custody:-
Where any person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on accusation of having
committed a non-bailable offence he may apply to the High Court or the Court of Session
for a direction under sec. 438 that in the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail.
*It was held in Adri Dharam dass v/s State of W.B-2005; it was held that it is exercised in
case of an anticipated accusation of non-bailable offence. The object of this section is that
the moment a person is arrested if he has already obtained an order from High court of
Court of Session he shall be released immediately on bail without being sent to jail.
*It was also held in Vaman Narain Ghiya v/s State of Rajasthan-2009, direction u/s 438
that the applicant shall be released on bail whenever arrested for whichever offence
whatsoever such a blanket order should not be passed.
It was further observed that direction under sec.438 is to be issued at pre-arrest stage,
with some conditions:-
i) That the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a Police officer as and
when required. ii) The person shall not directly or indirectly make any inducement, threat or
promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case. iii) That the person shall not
leave India without the previous permission of the court. iv) If such person is thereafter
arrested without warrant by Police on such accusation and is prepared either at the time of
arrest or at any time while in the custody of police station to give bail, he shall be released
on bail.
14:-Discuss the provisions relating to revision to criminal cases. Can

High Court exercising revision powers?
INTRODUCTION: – Revision is also a judicial remedy which has been mentioned in sec.397
of the code. The main object of revision is to examine the purity, validity, relevancy or
regulation or any order, finding or sentence. This section gives powers to High Court and
the Session Judge to call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior
Criminal Court within its or his local jurisdiction. The followings are the provisions regarding
when the revision shall be done:-
1. Calling for records to exercise powers of revision: – The High court or the Session Judge
may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior criminal court of
his jurisdiction for the purpose of satisfying as to the correctness, legality or propriety of
any finding, sentence or order recorded or passed, u/s 397 of the code. Case Johar &
Others v/s Mangal Prasad and another-2008, it was held that trial court is not found to be
passed without considering relevant evidence or by considering irrelevant evidence.
In a case of Badri Lal v/s State of M.P.-1989: The powers under this section are
undoubtedly wide and the Session Judge can take up the matter suo motu, it must be seen
that the criminal law is not used as an instrument of private vengeance.
Kuldeep Singh v/s State of M.P.-1989: It was held that the order framing charge could not
be lightly interfered with in revision.
In vinod kumar v/s Mohawati-1990: That the court of Session has similar powers as of High
Court in revision and as the High Court is authorized to take additional evidence in revision.
In Gram Sabha Lakhanpur v/s Ram Dev-1993:- It was held that the complainant may or
may not have a legal right of being heard but the rule of prudence and natural justice
requires that the aggrieved party must be afforded an opportunity of hearing.
In a case of Mahavir singh v/s Emperor-1944: The regularity of any proceedings of such
inferior court where the finding sentence or order is illegal or improper and where the
proceedings are irregular.
Case of T.B.Hariparsad v/s State-1977, it was held that the powers of revision cannot be
used through interlocutory orders passed in any appeal inquiry, trial or other proceedings
under sec. 397(2).
In a case of Paul George v/s State-2002, it was held that during the hearing of Revision
argue the person applying for revision should be considered seriously even though if they
are too brief.
2. Order of Inquiry:- Sec. 398 of the code provides powers of issuing order of inquiry to
High Court or court of Session. Accordingly on examining any record under sec.397 or
otherwise the High Court or Session Judge may direct CJM by himself or by any of
Magistrate subordinate to him to make inquiry of any complaint which has been dismissed
under sec.203 or the case of any person accused of an offence who has been discharged.
3. Powers of Revision of Court of Session: – Sec.399 provides powers of revision to court of

session in the case of any proceeding the record of which has been called for by himself.
The session judge may exercise all or any of the powers which may he exercised by the
High Court.
Where an application for revision is made by or on behalf of any person before the session
judge the decision of the session judge shall be final and no further proceedings by way of
revision a the instance of such person shall be entertained by the High Court or any other
court. These powers of revision have been provided to the Addl. Session Judge under
sec.400.
4. Powers of Revision of High Court: – Sec.401 of the code provides powers of revision to
High Court that in case of any proceeding the record of which has been called by itself or
which otherwise comes to its knowledge, the High Court may exercise any of the powers
conferred on a court of appeal by sec. 386, 389, 390 and 391 or on court of session by sec.
307. Thus during revision High Court shall be able to exercise all powers which an appellate
court can do. In case of Vimal Singh v/s Khuman Singh-1998: Supreme Court restricted the
area of revision generally the order of acquittal is not interfered. Powers of revision can be
exercised in following situations:-i)Where severe illegality has occurred by trial court.
ii) Where the order of trial court has failed to provide justice.
iii) Where the trial court has tried a case which fall beyond its jurisdiction.
iv) Where the trial court has stopped taking evidence unlawfully.
Here it is pertinent to mention that any party has applied for revision believing that no
appeal lies there but an appeal lies there then the court shall consider such application for
appeal in the interest of justice u/s 401(2). The order of acquittal cannot be reversed into
an order of conviction in revision as held in case of Singher Singh v/s State of Haryana-
2004, u/s 401(3).
5. Power of High Court to withdraw or transfer revision cases:-whenever one or more

persons convicted at the same trial makes an application to High Court for revision. The
High Court shall direct that the applications for revision made to it be transferred to the
Session Judge who will deal with the same as if it were an application made before him,
under sec. 402 of this code.
6.Copy of the order to be send to lower court:- Sec. 405 of the code provides that where
any case is revised by High Court or court of session, it or he shall in the manner provided
by sec.388, certify its decision or order to the court of by which the finding, sentence or
order revised was recorded or passed and the court to which decision or order is so certified
shall thereupon make such orders as are confirmable to the decision so certified and if
necessary record shall be amended in accordance there with.
15.Discuss the provisions of Judgment. Can court alter its own

Judgment?
INTRODUCTION: – It must contain the judgment comes out from every trial in any criminal
court of its original jurisdiction which is to be pronounced in open court by the presiding
officer immediately after the termination of the trial. Judgment can be delivered in whole or
the operative part of the judgment and explaining the substance of the judgment in a
language which is understood by the accused. The provisions however are as under:-
1. Contents of Judgement:- Section 353 of cr.P.C-1973 provides that the judgement in

every trial in any criminal shall be pronounced in the open court by the presiding officer just
after the completion of the trail or at some subsequent time which notice shall be given to
the parties or their advocates. It can be delivered as a whole of the judgement or can by
reading out the of judgement. If may also be byreading the operative part of the
judgement in such language which easily be understood by the accused or his advocate.
a)Each and every page of judgment when it is made should be singed, mentioning the date
of delivery of the judgment in open court.
b) No judgment which is delivered by any criminal court shall be deemed to be invalid by

reason only of the absence of any party or his advocate on the day or place notified for the
delivery of the judgment.
c) As soon as the judgment is pronounced a copy of the same immediately be made

available for the perusal of the parties free of cost.
d)If the accused is in the custody he shall be brought up to hear the judgment pronounced.
And if the accused is not in custody he shall be required by the court to attend to hear the
judgement pronounced.
e) Where there are more accused than one and one or more of them do not attend the
court on date on which the judgement is pronounced. Presiding officer to avoid delay in the
disposal of the case pronounce the judgement even their absence.
2.Language & contents of Judgement: – According to sec.354 the judgement should be

written in language of court which contains points for determination, the decision thereon
and the reasons for the decision. If it be a judgement of acquittal, shall state the offence of
which accused is acquittal and direct that he be set at liberty. Sec.354(3) when all the
murderers are to be sentenced with death sentence will become a dead law as held in a
case of Muniappan v/s State of Tami Nadu-1981.
3 Order for notifying address of previously convicted offender: – When any person having
been convicted by a court in India of an offence punishable which relates to criminal
intimidation with imprisonment for a term of three years or upwards is again convicted of
any offence punishable Court may order that his residence and any change of such
residence after release be notified. Such rules may provide for punishment for the breach
thereof, under sec.356.
4.Order to pay compensation: – When a court imposes a sentence of fine or a sentence

including sentence of death of which fine forms a part the court may at the time of passing
judgement the whole or any part of fine recovered to be applied. In the payment to any
person of compensation for any loss or injury caused by the offence when compensation is
in the opinion of the court recoverable by such person in a civil court. At the time of
awarding compensation in any civil suit relating to the same matter the court shall take into
account any sum paid or recovered ass compensation on the provisions laid down in this
sec.357, in case of Mangilal v/s State of MP-2004. In Sube singh v/s State of Haryana-
2006, is a fit case to award compensation.
5. Special Reasons to be recorded in certain cases:- As per provisions laid down in sec.361
of cr.P.C.,where in any case the court could have deal with an accused person under
sec.360 under the provisions of probation of offenders Act or a young offender under
children act or any other law for the time being in force for the treatment, training or
rehabilitation of young offenders has not done so. It must be recorded in judgement giving
special reasons for having not done so, as held in a case of State of Himachal Predesh v/s
Lat Singh-1990.
6. Court not to alter judgement:- Provisions lays in the sec. 362 or by any other law for the
time being in force, no court when it has signed the judgement or final order disposing of a
case shall alter or review the same except to correct clerical or arithmetical error. In case of
Naresh & others v/s State of U.P.-1981.
7. Copy of the Judgement to be given to the accused & other persons:-When the accused is
sentenced to imprisonment a copy of the judgement shall immediately after the
pronouncement of the judgement be given to him free of cost. In case of Ladli Prasad
Zutshi v/s State of Allahbad-1931, it was held that even public has a right to obtain a copy
of the judgement of any criminal court. This has been provided in sec. 363 of Cr.P.C.-1973.
8. Judgement when to be translated: – As per instructions u/s 364 it is said that the original
judgement shall be filed with the record of the proceedings and where the original is
recorded in a language different from that of the court and the accused so requires a
translation thereof into the language of the court shall be added to such record.
9. Court of Session to send copy of finding and sentence to District Magistrate:- The cases
tried by the court of Session or a CJM the court or such Magistrate shall forward a copy of
its or his finding and sentence if any to the District Magistrate within whose local jurisdiction
the trial was held as provided in sec. 365 of Cr.P.C.-1973.
16: Analyse the provisions of grant of Anticipatory bail. Can anticipatory

bail be allowed in Murder case? If so when?
INTRODUCTION: – Anticipatory bail has an important place in the series of Bail. Its main
object is to protect the innocent persons from arrest under sec. 438 of the criminal
procedure code-1973 lays down the provisions regarding grant of anticipatory bail.
· What is Anticipatory Bail: – In-spite of the fact that the Cr.P.C., has not defined
Anticipatory Bail but it means that when a person has a reason to believe that he may be
arrested on accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to High
Court or to the court of Session that in the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail
at that time it is anticipatory bail. It is also called Apprehension Bail on the basis of
provisions laid down in sec. 438 of cr.P.C.
· Object of the Anticipatory Bail:- The object of Anticipatory bail is to protect a person
from arrest. A person against whom a warrant of arrest has been issued shall first be
arrested kept in custody for few days and then released on bail, it means where there is no
purpose for the arrest he shall not be arrested.
· When anticipatory Bail would be Accepted:- Section 438(1) says that, “when any
person has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed
a non-bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or court of Session for a direction
under this sec.438(1) and court if thinks it fit, can direct that in event of such arrest he
shall be released on bail.” Case of Gurbaksh Singh v/s State of Punjab-1980, he was not
granted anticipatory bail merely on fear of arrest. In a similar case of Ashok kumar v/s
State of Rajasthan-1980, that anticipatory bail should not accepted until there is a definite
fear of arrest and such fact has come before the court.
It is pertinent to mention here that reason to believe does not mean mere fear, i.e. mere
‘fear’ is not sufficient cause. Grounds on which belief is based must be capable of being
examined.
· Who shall accept the Anticipatory Bail:- Sec. 438 (1) that the following authorities may
accept the anticipator bail application:
i. High Court ii. Court of Session
That any accused of an offence and in custody be released on bail on acceptance of bail
application in the above said courts u/s 439 of Cr.P.C.
· Conditions of Grant Anticipatory Bail:-Court can impose reasonable conditions for grant
of anticipatory bail. Those conditions have been mentioned in section 438(2). When the
High Court or Court of Session make a direction with some conditions in the light of the
facts of the particular case as it may think fit for bail:-
a. That the person shall not leave India without previous permission of the court.
b. That person directly or indirectly make an inducement threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the
court or to any police Officer.
c. That the person shall make himself available for interrogation by a police officer as and
when required.
d. That any such other condition as may be imposed under sec.437 if the bail is granted
under this section.
ANTICIPATORY BAIL IN MURDER CASE: – There is no set principle fixed for grant of
anticipatory bail. It is basically depends upon the facts and circumstances of every case and
the nature of the case. Generally the anticipatory bail is not to be granted in the matters
like murder, unnatural death, dourly death.
A case if SamunderSingh v/s State of Rajasthan -1987, the court held that the anticipatory
bail cannot be accepted in dowry death cases especially where father-in-law and mother-in-
law caused unnatural death of the daughter-in-law.
Similarly refusing to grant of anticipatory bail in the matters of atrocities to schedule

tribe and schedule caste was held to be constitutional in a case of State v/s Ram kishore
Batolia-1995.
Anticipatory bail has also been refused in the matters of FERA, a case of Dukhishyam
Venupanni v/s Arun Kumar Bajoria-1998.
Even the facts mentioned above the anticipatory bail can be granted in Murder cases on the
basis of following circumstances:-
i)When there is no apprehension about the absconding of the accused.
ii) When there is no apprehension of inducing or enticing witnesses by the accused.
iii) When there is no apprehension of the accused for moving abroad.
iv)Where the offence is not the severe or deadly nature.
HEARING OF PROSECUTION
The prosecution must be provided an opportunity of hearing while considering the

anticipatory bail as held in the case of State of Assam v/s R.K.Krishankumar-1998.
UNIT-V
INTRODUCTION:-Offences can be classi ed into two classes on the basis of bail:
Bailable offences: – Bailable offences are of general nature and in these offences it is right
of accused to be released on bail. Sec.436 of Cr.P.C. pertains to Bailable offences.
Non-Bailable offences: – These offences are of severe nature and bail cannot be claimed as
right in them. In such cases bail depends upon the discretion of the court. Sec. 437 relates
to Non-bailable offences, under section 437 and 439 relates to non-bailment offence.
Grant of Bail in Non-bailable offences: – Sec. 437 provides that when any person accused of
or suspected of commission of any non bailable offence is arrested or detained without
warrant by an Officer I/C of a Police station or appears or is brought before a court other
than the High Court or court of Session he may be released on bail.
Thus section 437 empowered a Magistrate to take bail in non bailable offences. The
provision of this makes it clear that bail in non bailable offences depends upon the
discretion of the court.
When bail shall be Granted:- Sec. 437(1) of the code lays down the following situations in
which bail shall not be granted by the Magistrate:-
i) When the Magistrate believes that there are reasonable grounds of guilty of
offence punishable.
ii) If person has been previously convicted of an offence punishable on two or

more times.
CONDIIONS FOR BAIL
1 Sec. 437(3) of the code provides that where a person accused or suspected of the
commission of an offence punishable which may extend to seven year or more or of an
offence defined in IPC and any such offence the accused is released on bail the court
however may impose any condition which the court considers necessary:-
1. That such person shall attend in accordance with conditions mentioned in the bond
executed by him.
2. Such person shall not commit an offence of the similar to an offence of which he is
accused or is suspected.
ARREST OF A PERSON
Introduction: – Generally, a person is arrested by the order of the magistrate or by a
warrant. A police officer cannot arrest a person arbitrarily or without the order of magistrate
or without warrant. But this rule has few exceptions to it which means that under certain
circumstances a person can be arrested without the order of the magistrate or without
warrant.
Arrest without warrant:- Sec. 41 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 provides that a police
officer can arrest a person without the orders or warrant of the magistrate in following
situations:
(8) When any person has been concerned in any cognizable offence or against whom
a reasonable complaint has been made or credible information has been received or a
reasonable suspicion exists. Of his having been so concerned.
(9) When any person has in his possession without lawful excuse any implement of
house-breaking.
(10) When any person in whose possession anything is found which may reasonably be
suspected to be stolen property and who may reasonably be suspected of having committed
an offence with reference to such things.
(11) When any person obstructs a police officer while in the execution of his duty, or who
has escaped, or attempts to escape from lawful custody.
(12) When any person is reasonably suspected of being a deserter from any of the
armed forces of the union.
(13) When any person being a released convict, commits a breach of any rule made
under sub-section (5) of section 356;
(14) When for any persons arrest any requisition, whether written or oral, has been
received from another police officer, provided that the requisition specifics the person to be
arrested.
Thus, in this way a police officer under sec 41(1) can arrest any person without the order or
warrant of a magistrate.
CHARGE
INTRODUCTION: – The object of the rule embodied in the sec. 218 of Cr. P. C., is to ensure
a fair trial and to see that the accused is not bewildered or perplex to confuse by having
been asked to defend several unconnected charges or distinct offences lumped together in
one charge or in separate charges. We will read the rules relating to joinder of charges
described in different part of this section. There is no exception to the rule that there should
be separate charge for each offence. The detail study of this section is as under:-
DEFINITION: – For every distinct offence of which any person is accused there shall be a
separate charge and every charge shall be tried separately. Where the accused person by
an application in writing, so desires and the Magistrate is of opinion that such person is not
likely to be prejudiced thereby, Magistrate may try together all or any number of the
charges famed against such person.
1. Effect of Contravention of Sec.218:- The effect of the contravention of the provisions of

this sec. has been considered by the Supreme Court in following number of cases:- Sushil
Kumar v/s Joy Shankar-1971: It was held that charges under 408 and 477A of IPC could be
tried together. In this case several persons accused on several items of embezzlement were
tried jointly. There was no failure of justice in consequence of the joinder of charges had
occurred. In V.N. KAMDAR v/s DELHI MUNICIPALITY-1973: It was held, “that the provisions
of sec. 218 to 224 would indicate that separate charge and separate trial for such distinct
offence is the normal rule and joint trial is an exception when the accused have committed
separate offence.”
2. Failure to Explain injuries on the accused:- When the prosecution fails to explain
satisfactorily the injuries sustained by the accused there are number of judicial
pronouncements on this point. Case State of Gujrat v/s Bai Fatima-1975: It was held that
the accused had inflicted the injuries on the members of the prosecution party in exercise of
the right of self-defence.
3. Three offences of the same kind within year may be charged together:- under section
219 of Cr. P. C. when a person is accused of more offences than one of the same kind
committed within the space of twelve months from the first to the last of such offences, he
may be charged with and tried at one trial for any number of them not exceeding three.
Provisions of section are only enabling provisions, it applies where offences are of the same
kind but it does not apply where offences are not of the same kind such as criminal breach
of trust and falsification of accounts. Rahmat v/s State of U. P.-1980.
Trial for than one offence:- If in one series of Acts so connected together as to form the
same transaction more offences than one are committed by the same person, he may be
charged with and tried at one trial for every such
APPEALS & ITS LIMITATION PERIOD

INTRODUCTION:-Appeal is an important remedy for person’s dissatisfied from judgment
finding and orders of the trial court. Under section 372 of the Cr.P.C., it is provided that
relation to appeal it is necessary to know that no appeal shall lie from any judgment or
order of a criminal court except as provided by this code or any other law for time being in
force, case Garikapati v/s Subhash coudhari-1957. However the provisions regarding
making an appeal are the following:-
1. Appeal from orders requiring security or refusal to accept or rejecting surety for keeping
peace or good behavior: – Any person who has been ordered to give security for keeping
the peace or for good behavior or who is aggrieved by any order refusing to accept or
rejecting a surety on the basis of sec.373.
2. Appeals from Convictions: – According to section 374 of code that any person convicted
on a trial by a H/C in its extraordinary original criminal jurisdiction may appeal to Supreme
Court similar any person convicted by session judge or on a trial held by any other court
which sentence or imprisonment is more than 7 years may appeal to High court. Case
Panchi v/s State of U.P.-1998, In C.Gopinathan v/s State of Kerala-1991
3. Appeal by State against sentence: – Under sec.377, the state Government may in any
case of conviction on a trial held by any court other than a H/C direct the Public Prosecutor
to present an appeal against the sentence on the ground of its inadequacy to Court of
Session if the sentence is passed by the Magistrate or to the H/C if the sentence is passed
by any other Court. When an appeal is filed against the sentence on the ground of its
inadequacy court shall not enhance the sentence except after giving to the accused a
reasonable opportunity of sowing cause against such enhancement. Case of Nadir Khan v/s
State-1976.
4. Appeal in case of Acquittal :- In an appeal against acquittal under sec.378 the H/C has
full power to review at large the evidence on which the acquittal is based and to reach the
conclusion that the order of acquittal should be reversed as held in case of Mohandas v/s
State of MP-1973, but exercising his power the H/C should give proper weight and
consideration to the view of the trial judge as to the credibility of witnesses, presumption of
innocence in favour of the accused. And a right of the accused to the benefit of any doubt.
It was also held in State of U.P. v/s Gambir Singh-2005 case of appeal against acquittal if
on same evidence two views are possible, the one in favour of accused must be preferred.
During the hearing of appeal from the order of acquittal it should be taken into
consideration that there is no miscarriage of justice, case Allahrakha K. Mansuri v/s State of
Gujrat-2002. The order of acquittal cannot be dismissed merely on the ground that a
second approach could have been applied in the case and it means that the accused could
have been convicted on considering another view a case of Chandra Singh v/s State of
Gujrat-2002.
COMPLAINT CASE
DEFINITION: – Sec. 200 says, that the preliminary procedure which a Magistrate shall
follow on receiving a complaint. It is obligatory to examine the complainant and the
witnesses and a summary dismissal without them is not legal. The substance of such
examination shall be reduced to writing and shall be signed by the complainant and the
witnesses and also by the Magistrate. If a public servant acting or purporting to act in the
discharge of his official duties or a court has made the complaint or the magistrate makes
over the case for inquiry or trial to another Magistrate under sec.192.
1. Procedure by Magistrate not competent to take cognizance of the case: If a complaint

made to a Magistrate who is not competent to take cognizance of the offence he shall
return it for presentation to the proper court with an endorsement to that effect or where
the complaint is not in writing then he will direct the complainant to the proper court as
provided in sec.201 of Cr.P.C.Case of Rajender Singh v/s State of Bihar, 1989.
2. To Postponement of issue of Process:- Sec.202 of the code provided that where it

appears to the magistrate that the offence complained is triable exclusively by the court of
Sessions or where the complaint has not been made by a court unless the complainant and
the witnesses present have been examined on oath under sec.200. If an investigation is
made by a person not being a Police officer he shall have for that investigation all the
powers conferred by this code on an officer in charge of a police station except the power o
arrest without warrant. Sec. has provided to ascertain the following: i) to ascertain the facts
constituting the offence.
ii) To prevent abuse of process resulting in wastage of time of the court and harassment to
the accused.
iii) To help the magistrate to judge if there is sufficient ground for calling the investigation
and for proceeding with the case. Case: Balraj Khanna v/s Motiram-1971.
3. Dismissal of Complaint: – A Magistrate may dismiss a complaint if after considering the

statement on oath of the complainant and of the witnesses and the result of inquiry or
investigation under sec.202. But where there is sufficient ground for preceding the
Magistrate cannot dismiss the complaint under sec.203 of the code. If he finds that no
offence has been committed, if he distrusts the statement or if he distrusts the complainant
may direct for further inquiry. In such cases he may refuse to issue process. Case Sulab
Chandra v/s Abdula-1926. These are the provisions under sec.203 of Cr.P.C.
ANTICIPATORY BAIL
INTRODUCTION: – Anticipatory bail has an important place in the series of Bail. Its main
object is to protect the innocent persons from arrest under sec. 438 of the criminal
procedure code-1973 lays down the provisions regarding grant of anticipatory bail.
What is Anticipatory Bail: – In-spite of the fact that the Cr.P.C., has not defined Anticipatory
Bail but it means that when a person has a reason to believe that he may be arrested on
accusation of having committed a non-bailable offence, he may apply to High Court or to
the court of Session that in the event of such arrest he shall be released on bail at that time
it is anticipatory bail. It is also called Apprehension Bail on the basis of provisions laid down
in sec. 438 of cr.P.C.
Object of the Anticipatory Bail:- The object of Anticipatory bail is to protect a person from
arrest. A person against whom a warrant of arrest has been issued shall first be arrested
kept in custody for few days and then released on bail, it means where there is no purpose
for the arrest he shall not be arrested.
When anticipatory Bail would be Accepted:- Section 438(1) says that, “when any person
has reason to believe that he may be arrested on an accusation of having committed a non-
bailable offence, he may apply to the High Court or court of Session for a direction under
this sec.438(1) and court if thinks it fit, can direct that in event of such arrest he shall be
released on bail.” Case of Gurbaksh Singh v/s State of Punjab-1980, he was not granted
anticipatory bail merely on fear of arrest. In a similar case of Ashok kumar v/s State of
Rajasthan-1980, that anticipatory bail should not accepted until there is a definite fear of
arrest and such fact has come before the court. It is pertinent to mention here that reason
to believe does not mean mere fear, i.e. mere ‘fear’ is not sufficient cause. Grounds on
which belief is based must be capable of being examined.
1. Who shall accept the Anticipatory Bail
a. Sec. 438 (1) that the following authorities may accept the anticipatory bail application:
High Court, Court of Session.
That any accused of an offence and in custody be released on bail on acceptance of bail
application in the above said courts u/s 439 of Cr.P.C.
Conditions of Grant Anticipatory Bail:-Court can impose reasonable conditions for grant of
anticipatory bail. Those conditions have been mentioned in section 438(2). When the High
Court or Court of Session make a direction with some conditions in the light of the facts of
the particular case as it may think fit for bail:-
b. That the person shall not leave India without previous permission of the court. b)That
person directly or indirectly make an inducement threat or promise to any person
acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade him from disclosing such facts to the
court or to any police Officer. c. That the person shall make himself available for
interrogation by a police officer as and when required.
POWERS OF CRIMINAL COURTS

INTRODUCTION: – Chapter III of the criminal procedure code deals with the Powers of
Courts to take cognizance of the offences. For this purpose the offences are divided into two
groups, i) Offences under IPC, and ii) offences under any other law. The courts by which
these two offences are triable are specified below:-
Courts by which these two offences are triable: – As per provisions laid down in section 26
of the cod, the courts by which offences are triable:-
3. a) Any offence under IPC-45 may be tried by High Court. B) Session Court. c)
Any other court by which such offence is shown in the first schedule to be triable.
4. Any offence under any other law, when any Court is mentioned in this behalf in such
law, is tried by: i) High Court. ii) Any other court by which such offence is shown in the first
schedule.
Section 27: Jurisdiction in the case of Juveniles: Any offence not punishable with death or
imprisonment for life who at the date when he appears or is brought before court under the
age of 16 years may be tried by the court of CJM or any other court which specially
empowered.
Sentences which High Courts and Session Judges may pass: – As per provision laid down in
Sect. 28 of the code that:- (i) High Court may pass any sentence authorized by law. (ii)
Session Judge or ADJ may pass any sentence authorized by law but any sentence of death
passed by such judges shall be subject to confirmation by the High Court.
Sentences which Magistrates may pass:- Sec.29 of Code, The court of CJM may pass any
sentence authorized by law except sentence of death or of imprisonment for life or
imprisonment for a term exceeding 7 years.
The court of Magistrate of First Class may pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not
exceeding three years or of fine not exceeding Rs.10, 000.
The court of 2nd Class Magistrate may pass an imprisonment for a term not exceeding One
year or of fine not exceeding Rs.5000/- or of both.
Sentence of Imprisonment in default of fine:-The court of Magistrate may award such term
of imprisonment in default of payment of fine as authorized by law under sec.30 of the
code, not exceeding one fourth of the term of imprisonment and also not excess of the
powers.
SUMMARY TRIALS
On the basis of provisions under section 260 of the code, power to try summarily: –
notwithstanding anything contained in this code, Any CJM, Any metropolitan Magistrate or
any Magistrate of the first class specially empowered in this behalf by the High Court, may
if thinks fit try a summary way in all or any of the following offences. Summary trial can
also be done by the magistrate of second class u/s 261 of the code; the High Court may
confer on any magistrate invested with the powers of a Magistrate of the second class. If
any from the above Magistrate’s thinks fit, may try in a summary way for all or any of the
following offences:-
1. Offences not punishable with death imprisonment for life imprisonment for a term
exceeding two years.
2. Theft under sec. 379, 380 and 381 of IPC where the value of the property stolen does
not exceed two thousand rupees.
3. Receiving of retaining of stolen property under sec.411, IPC, where the value of the
property does not exceed two thousand rupees.
4. Assisting in the concealment or disposal of stolen property under sec. 414 of IPC, where
the value of such property does not exceed two thousand rupees. 5. Offences under section
454 and 455 of IPC.
6. Insult with intent to provoke a breach of the peace under sec. 504 and with
imprisonment for term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both, under sect.
506 of IPC. 7. Abetment of any of the foregoing offences. 8. An attempt to commit any of
the foregoing offences when such attempt is an offence.
The mode of trial is sought to be altered under this sub-section the trial must from its
inception to be conducted in the regular manner, case of State v/s D.N.Patel-1971. The
Magistrate under this section as a discretion o try the offences specified in this section in a
summarily way.
Procedure of summary trials: – Under sec. 262 of the code is related to the procedure for
summary trial, shall be the same as in summons case except in so far as it is modified by
the provisions. In the case of summary trial the limit of term of sentence of imprisonment is
three months. However if the court is considers it necessary that a longer sentence is
necessary in the interest of justice in any case the trial should be held as in a warrant case
or as a summon case according to the nature of the offence.
PLEA BARGAINING
Under section 265A of the code, described that the application of the provisions
of this section in respect of accused against whom the report has been forwarded by the
officer in charge of Police station under sec.173, the offence appears to have been
committed by him and the Magistrate has taken cognizance of an offence on complaint
other than an offence for which the punishment of death or life imprisonment or
imprisonment for a term exceeding seven years and examining complainant and witnesses
issued the process as per law.
Application for plea bargaining: Sec.265B of the code lays that a person accused of an
offence may file application for plea bargaining in the court in which the offence is pending
for trial. The application accompanied by an affidavit sworn by the accused stating therein
that he has voluntarily preferred after understanding the nature and extent of punishment
provided under the law for the offence the plea bargaining in his case and that he has not
previously been convicted by a court in a case which he had been charged with the same
offence.
FINALITY OF THE JUDGEMENT:- The judgment delivered by the court under section 265G
shall be final and no appeal except the special leave petition under article 136 and writ
petition under article 226 and 227 of the Indian constitution shall lie in any court against
such judgment.
POWER OF THE COURT IN PLE BARGAINING:- A court shall have for the purposes of
discharging its functions under the provisions in section 265H, all he powers vested in
respect of bail, trial of offences and other matters relating to the disposal of a case in such
court on the basis of above provisions.
admin

Criminal Procedure Code - CRPC Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Procedure Code - CRPC Notes

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Criminal Procedure Code - CRPC Notes

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What rights does an arrested person have according to the CrPC?

What rights does an arrested person have according to the CrPC?

What are the conditions for summary trial of certain offenses according to the CrPC?

What are the conditions for summary trial of certain offenses according to the CrPC?

9/1/2019 Criminal Procedure Code - CrPC Notes - LawOrdo

Criminal Procedure Code – CrPC Notes

Criminal Procedure Code – CrPC Notes

3. Right to be taken to magistrate without delay – Section 57 – of CrPC. It says that, No

7. Right to be examined by a medical practitioner – While Section 53 allows a police officer

QUESTION 2:- Elaborate the trial of Warrant of cases by a Magistrate?

1) Procedure of trial of warrant cases instituted on a police report.

2) Procedure of trial of warrant cases instituted otherwise than on a police report.

A.-Cases instituted on a police report

Section 238 – Compliance with section 207

If a warrant case is tried as a summons case, the trial vitiates.

Section 239 – When accused shall be discharged

Section 240 – Framing of charge

Section 241 – Conviction on plea of guilty

Section 242 – Evidence for prosecution

The term examination means the examination, cross-examination and re-examination.

Section 243 – Evidence for defence

B.-Cases instituted otherwise than on police report

Section 244 – Evidence for prosecution

Section 245 – When accused shall be discharged

Section 246 – Procedure where accused is not discharged.

Section 247 – Evidence for defence.

Section 248 – Acquittal or conviction

Section 249 – Absence of complainant

Section 250 – Compensation for accusation without reasonable cause.

The provisions of this section apply to summons-cases as well as to warrant cases.

QUESTION 3:- Discuss the provisions of tender of pardon?

SECTION 306-Tender of pardon to accomplice

In some cases pardon once granted and accepted cannot be withdrawn.

SECTION 307-Power to direct tender of pardon

SECTION 308-Trial of person not complying with conditions of pardon

Question4. What do you mean by FIR? In what circumstances a

INTRODCTION:-First information report and investigation plays an important role in

ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF F.I.R.

ii) Information must relate to a cognizable offence.

Section 154 says- As soon as the Officer-in-charge receives information of commission of a

CIRCUMSTANCES WHEN MAGISTRATE ORDERS FOR INVESTIGATION: – Investigation

Section 155 of the Code of criminal procedure provides that:-

4. An investigation in a non-cognizable offence made under the order of Magistrate is

5. Discuss the provisions relating to Information to the police and their

INTRODUCTION: – Section 154 speaks of information relating to the commission of a

1. INFORMATION IN CONIZABE CASES:- Every information relating to the commission of

3. Refusal to record the information:- If any officer-in-charge of police station refuses to

7. IMPORTANCE OF FIR:- On consideration its important from every angle it is noticed

8. Duty to register FIR:- In a case of Rajender Singh Katoch v/s Chandigarh

Whether the delay is so long as to throw a cloud of suspicion on deeds of the

11. Powers to investigate:-Under section156 the police is empowered to investigate into a

6. Brief the Jurisdiction of criminal Courts in inquiries &Trials. OR “Every

INTRODUCTION: – A Magistrate within whose local jurisdiction the offence is committed is

1. Place of inquiry or trial in certain matters:- Sec.178, when it is uncertain in which of

4. Place of trial in case of certain offences:-Any offence of being a thug or murder

6. Offence committed on journey or voyage:- When an offence is committed while the

8. Offences Committed Outside India:- When offences is committed outside India by a

7. DISCUSS THE JOINDER OF CHARGES UNDER CODE OF CRIMINAL