Case Under IPC 34, 353
Rahul Deshpande
(Querist) 08 January 2010
This query is : Resolved
My client has been registered under a criminal case & charged by police constable under IPC section 34,353 in year 1998. The case has come up for evidance now. The charges have been framed. Like to know whether judge can discharge him under following circumstances:
1. Incase prosecution witness deny that they do not remember the event.
2. Incase prosecution witness does not turn up or police constable does not turn up
3. Incase police constable did not to attch duty report or attendance to prove he was on duty at the time of event to the chargesheet
4.If not under above; any other things which you can suggest which can go favourable for him.
Furhter ,like to know the case judgements that will be helpful in this case with a general opinion in regard to judgements in IPC353 cases
What would be the circumstances in which he can be acquited keeping in view the fact that case is around 12 yrs old & burden of proof is on state.
Thanks
Saket
Devajyoti Barman
(Expert) 08 January 2010
One first understand that there is a difference between discharge and acquittal.Your query relates more with the question of acquittal than discharge.
1. If all the prosecution es deny the happening of the event of feign ignorance then definitely benefit of doubt would be given to accused person and in all probability he would be acquitted.
2. Mere not turning up prosecution witness is not sufficient to acquit the accused person as there is lot of scope in the Code to compel their attendance.
3.Then his testimony would loose much of its significance if not all.
4.All the conditions mentioned above seems to be in his favour.
Without seeing the chargesheet it is difficult to mention any general circumstances though age of trial is no ground. You must keep in mind that the principle of criminal jurisprudence is 'case beyond reasonable doubt' wherby the accused person deemed to be innocent unless proved guilty.
Consult a good book on the subject.
Arvind Singh Chauhan
(Expert) 08 January 2010
If the statement recorded under Sec 161 and the document attached with charge sheet reveal so, as mentioned by you, are definitely good ground for discharge.
Guest
(Expert) 08 January 2010
NANDKUMAR B.SAWANT.M.COM.LL.B.(MUMBAI),ADVOCATE
MOBILE.09325226691, 09271971251
e.mail.adv.nbsawant@yahoo.co.in
e.mail.nandkumarbs@sify.com
REGARDING THE CASE UNDER SEC.353, 34 OF I.P.C.KINDLY NOTE THAT.
1.SEC.353,34 OF INDIAN PENAL CODE ARE APPLIED.IT IS A STATE CASE AND POLICE HAS FILED CHARGE SHEET WITH LIST OF WITNESSES.
2.SEC.353 IS COGNIZABLE AND NON BAILABLE AND NON COMPOUNDABLE OFFENCE AS PER INDIAN PENAL CODE.THIS IS OFFENCE AGAINST ANY PERSON WHO HAS PREVENTED ANY PUBLIC SERVANT FROM PERFORMING HIS DUTY.
3.IN SUCH CASES YOU HAVE TO STRONGLY DEFEND THE CRIMINAL CASE JUST LIKE ANY OTHER CRIMINAL CASE DEFENCES.
4.YOU MAY CHECK IF ANY DELAY IN FILING THE COMPLAINT ,DISCRIPENCIES IN STATEMENTS OF WITNESSES,DEFENCE OF ALIBI .INTERESTED WITNESSES.ETC.
5.KINDLY NOTE THAT DO NOT UNDER WRONG IMPRESSION THAT ANY GOVT.SSERVANT WITNESS
WILL DEPOSE IN YOUR FAVOUR.BECAUSE IT MAY PUT THEM IN TROUBLE IN THEIR OFFICIAL DUTY.PLEASE NOTE.
HENCE IT IS SUGGESTED TO DEFEND THE CASE STRONGLY TAKING ALL DEFENCES AVAILABLE IN CRIMINAL CASE.YOU WILL SUCCEED.
IN CASE YOU NEED ANY FURTHER HELP YOU MAY WRITE OR SEND DETAILS .
THANKING YOU
YOURS SINCERELY
NANDKUMAR B.SAWANT.M.COM.LL.B.(MUMBAI),ADVOCATE.
Rahul Deshpande
(Querist) 08 January 2010
Hi Devajyoti
Thanks for reply.Kindly guide on following.
1.What are the ground on which the accused can be acquitted by court?
2.Does the non-attachment of attendence sheet or duty sheet to chargesheet( to prove he was on duty) by constable can be strong reason to prove that circumstances as to case did not exsists?
3.Incase constable produces record of his attendance during course of trial - will that be admissible as evidence keeping in view the fact that he did not attach it initially with chargesheet?
4.The statement of doubt has been made in the chargesheet that accused could have been under influence of alcohol- but no medical/blood test report has been atttached. Will this favour accused?
5. Can accused get permanent exemption during course of trial incase counsel applies for it?
Looking forward to your opinion.
