397 of crpc
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 08 January 2012
This query is : Resolved
Dear Experts,
Can a revision under 397 is permitted for the charges imposed under sec 120B,420,467,468,471 and 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2) of PCA.
Initially prosecution pleaded for 120B and 13(1)(d) and later confined to 13(1)(d) during the stage of final argument. However judge has imposed all the sections as mentioned in the charge sheet ignoring the Spl.PP claim and of course the accused. At the time of argument Spl. PP mentioned only two sections and the argument of accused however was restricted to only those two sections.No defense was made to other sections/nor opportunity was given to the accused for the other sections.
- Can the judge is right enough in imposing any other sections other than those demanded by Spl.PP.
-Position of accused on this(when no opportunity was given to the other charges not demanded by Spl.PP) under 397.
Any other recourse other than 397 and
what next after 397.
Regards
Prabhakar
-
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 08 January 2012
If you are aggrieved by the order of the Magistrate during framing of charge you could challenge such order in the Sessions Court u/s 397 cprc.
The order passed in the Revision u/s 397 crpc can further be challenged in the High Court under section 482 of crpc.
Rajeev Kumar
(Expert) 08 January 2012
Yes i agree with Barman sir
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 08 January 2012
Thanks to Mr.D.Barman and Mr Rajeev.
The question of making additional charges other than those demanded by Spl.PP as mentioned in my first para may kindly be addressed.
Can it be mentioned in the revision under 397. Also Opportunity not provided to the accused for the other sections not demanded be mentioned in the revision.
Is it the only submitted documents are considered for 397 or any other material relevant documents can be submitted though it will be relevant to establish prima facie.
Regards
Prabhakar
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 08 January 2012
Even if special PP did not force for imposition of other charges than mentioned by you even then if trial magistrate finds material available on the file in support of challan, he may impose additional charges than argued. It is the duty of the defence counsel to stand on his own legs rather taking shelter of the lapse of the counsel for the prosecution.
Anyway, after framing of charges, revision lies but there is no use to mention the lapse of the Spl PP and thereby non-leading argument on the rest of the sections.
The defence counsel shall allege himself by doing so.
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 09 January 2012
Thanks to all the experts.
V R SHROFF
(Expert) 09 January 2012
Thanks to Mr.D.Barman and Mr Rajeev, to inform thre provisions correctly to Mr Prabhakar.
Shonee Kapoor
(Expert) 09 January 2012
Nothing more to ad.
Regards,
Shonee Kapoor
harassed.by.498a@gmail.com
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 22 January 2012
Dear Experts
Pl.guide me on
Is the Guideline mentioned in the SC judgement "State of Haryana And Ors Vs Bhajan Lal And Ors" on 21st November 1990 on exercising the extra ordinary powers under Article 226 or the inherent powers u/s 482 of CrPC till applicable.
Is there any subsequent judgement either fine tuning the guidelines further or negating the said judgement. If pl. provide the citations.
Regards
Prabhakar
Querist :
Anonymous
(Querist) 23 January 2012
In addition to my above query, kindly clarify further that is the conspiracy of murder should be distinguished from economic offence. Why the conspiracy citation of murder case is used for economic offence mostly for rejecting the plea of the accused. In my opinion both are different.
Regards
Prabhakar
