Surya R (business) 19 August 2025

Wrong section section 243(3) instead of 242(2) cr.p.c by complainant

in criminal case public prosecutor had filed documents u/s wrong section Section 243(3) instead of 242(2) Cr.P.C by complainant and court allowed documents and in order menioned same wrong order and pp no responding

will this be problem how to solve

Reply Follow

Quick Summary

A complainant mistakenly filed documents under Section 243(3) Cr.P.C. instead of the correct Section 242(2). While the court accepted the documents and noted the incorrect section, the public prosecutor is unresponsive. Generally, citing the wrong legal provision doesn't invalidate proceedings if the court's intent and the substance of the matter are clear. Courts often prioritise substance over technical errors, especially if the error doesn't mislead or prejudice any party.

3 Replies

P. Venu (Advocate) 19 August 2025

The facts, as posted, are less than convincing. The public prosecutor has no stnading in a complaint case.

Advocate Bhartesh goyal (advocate) 19 August 2025

Merely mentioning wrong provision of law in a court documents or application does not invalidate the proceedings or relief.Court has power to grant the relief under the correct provision. Court focus on the substance of the matter and the intention behind the action rather than the technical error in citing the law.

T. Kalaiselvan, Advocate (Advocate) 20 August 2025

In criminal cases, wrongly quoting a provision of law, while not ideal, is generally not fatal to the case if the court has the jurisdiction to address the matter and the substance of the case is clear. Courts prioritize substance over form, especially when the intention and relief sought are apparent and the error doesn't mislead or prejudice the other party. Courts are more concerned with the core arguments and the relief sought by a party rather than the specific legal provision cited.