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 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.

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 filing 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.
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 confirm 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 classified 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.
The Code of Criminal Procedure 1973 (Act No. 2 of 1974), the act to consolidate and amend
the law related to Criminal Procedure. It was put into practice by Parliament after twenty-four
years of the Republic of India as follows.
Introduction: Section 1 to 5
Law can be divided into two kinds, namely, (1) Substantial law and, (2) Procedural law.

Substantial law defines and regulates the powers rights, duties, and liabilities, of the parties,
whereas, Procedural law deals with methods and procedures to enforce the Substantial law.
Criminal Procedure Code is a Procedural law.

Criminal Procedure Code cannot be separated from any of the penal laws of the country. If
Substantial penal law is a major means to protect the society, the Procedural criminal law a Chief
mechanism to achieve and enforce the Substantial law. Before coming into force of the Criminal
Procedure code, 1973, the criminal Procedure code of 1898 was in force. In this new code, many
reforms were made, whose paramount object was the separation of the judicial from the
Executive.

In the Criminal Procedure code, 1973, in all, there are 37 Chapters, 484 Sections, and two
Schedules. In this First Schedule, there is the classification of the offenses and in the Second
Schedules, several forms have been included.

Criminal Procedure code, 1973 extends to the whole of India.(Section 1 ,Short title ,extent and
Commencement) It shall come into force on the 1st day of April 1974.

Under Section 2, the following important definitions have been mentioned:-

 “Bailable Offense” means an offense which is shown as bailable in the First Schedule, or
which is made bailable by any other law for the time being in force; and “non-bailable
offense” means any other offense.
 “Charge” includes any head of the charge when the charge contains more heads than one.

 “Cognizable offense” means an offense for which, and “cognizable case” means a case in
which, a police officer may, in accordance with the First Schedule or under any other law
for the time being in force, arrest without warrant.

 “Complaint” means any allegation made orally or in writing to a Magistrate, with a view
to his taking action under this Code, that some person, whether known or unknown, has
committed an offense, but does not include a police report.
 “High Court” means-
o In relation to any State, the High Court for that State ;

o In relation to a Union territory to which the jurisdiction of the High Court for a
State has been extended by law, that High Court;

o In relation to any other Union territory, the highest Court of criminal appeal for
that territory other than the Supreme Court of India;
 “India” means the territories to which this Code extends;

 “Inquiry” means every inquiry, other than a trial, conducted under this Code by a
Magistrate or Court;

 “Investigation” includes all the proceedings under this Code for the collection of
evidence conducted by a police officer or by any person (other than a Magistrate) who is
authorized by a Magistrate in this behalf;

 “Judicial Proceeding” includes any proceeding in the course of which evidence is or may
be legally taken on oath ;

 “Local jurisdiction”, in relation to a Court or Magistrate, means the local area within
which the Court or Magistrate may exercise all or any of its or his powers under this
Code ;

 “Non-Cognizable Offence” means an offense for which, and “non-cognizable case”

means a case in which, a police officer has no authority to arrest without warrant;

 “Offense” means any act or omission made punishable by any law for the time being in
force and includes any act in respect of which a complaint may be made under section 20
of the Cattle-trespass Act, 1871 ( 1 of 1871);

 “Officer in charge of a police station” includes, when the officer in charge of the police
station is absent from the station house or unable from illness or other cause to perform
his duties, the police officer present at the station-house who is next in rank to such
officer and is above the rank of constable or, when the State Government so directs, any
other police officer so present ;
 “Police Report” means a report forwarded by a police officer to Magistrate under sub-
section (2) of section 173;

 “Police Station” means any post or place declared generally or especially by the State
Government, to be a police station, and includes any local area specified by the State
Government in this behalf ;
  “Public Prosecutor” means any person appointed under section 24, and includes any
person acting under the directions of a Public Prosecutor ;
 “summons-case” means a case relating to an offense, and not being a warrant-case ;

 “victim” means a person who has suffered any loss or injury caused by reason of the act
or omission for which the accused person has been charged and the expression “victim”
includes his or her guardian or legal heir;
 “warrant-case” means a case relating to an offense punishable with death, imprisonment
for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years;

CLASSES OF CRIMINAL COURTS UNDER CRIMINAL PROCEDURE

CODE,1973:
As per the policy of separation between executive and judiciary, courts have been classified
mainly into two parts- Courts of Executive Magistrates and courts of Judicial Magistrate. These
courts have also different categories.
Section 6 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 provides followings classes of courts-
 Session courts
 Courts of Judicial Magistrate first class
 Courts of Judicial Magistrate Second class
 Courts of Executive Magistrate.
Similarly, courts of Metropolitan Magistrate have been established in Metropolitan areas.
In all, there are following categories of Criminal courts-
 Session courts
 Courts of Judicial Magistrate-
 Courts of First-class Judicial magistrate, and
 Courts of Second class judicial magistrate.
 Courts of Chief Judicial Magistrate
 Special Judicial Magistrate
 Metropolitan magistrate courts
 Special Metropolitan courts
  Executive Magistrate courts-
 District magistrate courts, and
 Sub- Division magistrate courts
 Special Executive magistrate courts.
In Rajasthan, all courts are functioning except Metropolitan Magistrate.
 Session Courts
According to Section 9 of the code, a court of sessions shall be established for every session –
division. Court of sessions shall have presiding judge named as ‘Session Judge’ who shall be
appointed by the High Court. The high court shall appoint Additional session judge and Assistant
session judge.
Abdul Manam v/s State of West Bengal (A.I.R 1996 S.C.905)

It has considered that session court shall include Additional session court. Assistant session court
shall be subordinate to the session court and the session court shall frame rules regarding the
distribution of works between Assistant session courts.

Additional or Assistant sessions court shall try the urgent application in the absence of session
court and in the absence of Additional or assistant session court such application shall be tried by
a chief judicial magistrate. (Section 10).

Powers of Punishment-
According to section 28 of the code – Session judge or Additional session judge can pronounce
any sentence provided by law, but the death sentence given by them should necessarily be
confirmed by the high court.

Assistant session judge can pronounce any sentence authorized by law other than a death
sentence, imprisonment for life or imprisonment exceeding ten years (section 11).

These courts can commute the sentence, but considering the nature of the matter, the gravity of
crime and behavior of accused the mere fact that trial was conducted for a long time cannot be
the ground to commute a sentence.
Judicial Magistrate courts
According to Section 11, every district excluding the Metropolitian area shall have first class and
second class judicial magistrate as per the necessity.

The state government in consultation with the High court can establish one or more special
courts to try special matters or class of special matters.

The presiding officer in such courts shall be appointed by the High court and high court can
transfer the power of the first class or second class magistrate to any member of state judicial
services acting as a judge in a civil court.

Delhi Judicial service union, Tis Hazari court, Delhi v/s State of Gujrat (A.I.R 1991 S.C.2176)-
Supreme court considered the post of the judicial officer as a post of honor and therefore should
behave according to the dignity of post.

Powers of Punishment:
According to section 29 of the code First class judicial magistrate court may pass a sentence of
imprisonment not exceeding three years or of fine not exceeding Rs 5,000/- or both.

The second class magistrate court may pass a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding one year,
or of fine not exceeding one thousand rupees or both.

According to sec. 29(2) First class magistrate can impose Rs 5,000/- as fine and not more. The
amount cannot be more than Rs.five thousand in matters even of dishonoureof cheque. (Pankaj
Bhai Nagji Bhai Patel v/s State of Gujrat, A.I.R 2001, S.C 567).

Court of Chief Judicial Magistrate

Section 12 of the code provides for the establishment of one court of a chief judicial magistrate
in every district and of additional chief judicial magistrate court as per the requirement. The
High court shall appoint on this post any first class judicial magistrate.

Power of Punishment:
According to section 29(1), The court of the chief judicial magistrate may pass any sentence
authorized by law except a sentence of death or imprisonment for life (LI) for a term not
exceeding seven years.

Metropolitan Magistrate Courts

Section 16 of the code provides for the establishment of the Metropolitan Magistrate court as per
the requirement. The presiding officer of the Metropolitan magistrate court is appointed by the
High court.
Power of Punishment
The court of Metropolitan magistrate shall have the power of first-class magistrate court Section
29(4).

Court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate

Section 17 of this code provides for the establishment of one Chief Metropolitan magistrate court
for every Metropolitan area. Similarly, there is also provision for the establishment of additional
chief Metropolitan magistrate court as per the requirements.

The High court can appoint any Metropolitan Magistrate to the post of Chief Metropolitan
magistrate or additional Chief Metropolitan magistrate.

Power of Punishment
According to section 29(4), the court of Chief Metropolitan Magistrate shall have the power of
the court of Chief judicial magistrate.

Special Magistrate courts

Section 13 of the code provides for the establishment of courts of the special judicial magistrate
to try particular cases or a particular class of cases. Such courts are established at a particular
time for a period of one year by the high court at the request of central or state government.

Almost a similar system has been provided by section 18 for Metropolitan areas. A person
appointed under sec. 18 shall be called special Metropolitan magistrate.

Courts of Executive Magistrate

Section 20 of the code provides for the courts of Executive magistrate.

According to it, the state government could establish in every district and every Metropolitan
area, the courts of Executive magistrate as per the requirements. One of this Executive magistrate
shall be district magistrate.

Similarly, additional district magistrate in a district and sub divisional magistrate in every sub
division can be appointed.
Section 21 of the code provides for the establishment of a special Executive magistrate court.

The powers of Executive Magistrate and special Executive magistrate shall be those which are
provided by the state government.
Sub-Ordination
The subordination of these courts shall be as follows-
1. The chief judicial magistrate shall be in subordination to session judges.

2. Other judicial magistrates shall be subordinate to Chief judicial magistrate while having a
general contest of session judges (section 15 (1)).

3. Chief Metropolitan Magistrate and Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate shall be

subordinate to the court of session.

4. Another Metropolitan magistrate shall be subordinate to Chief Metropolitan magistrate

while being under the general control of courts of the session. (Section 19(1)).

5. All Executive magistrate other than sub-divisional magistrate shall be subordinate to a

sub-divisional magistrate while being under the general control of district magistrate.

POWER OF COURTS TO GRANT BAIL IN NON BAILABLE CONDITIONS.

The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter called "CrPC") defines Bailable Offence to
"mean an offence which is shown as bailable in the First Schedule, or which is made bailable by
any other law for the time being in force; and "non-bailable offence" means any other offence.1"
The distinction between Bailable and Non-Bailable Offences is based on the gravity of the
offence, danger of accused absconding, tampering of evidence, previous conduct, health, age and
sex of the accused person. Though the schedule for classification of offences as Bailable or Non
Bailable is provided in CrPC; however, it is mostly the offences which are punishable with
imprisonment for not less than three years that are classified as Non-Bailable.

The question that arises for deliberation is whether there is any scope for grant of Bail in case the
offence falls within the category of Non-Bailable Offence. Section 437 of CrPC is required to be
studied in this regard. Section 437 of CrPC empowers the Court to release an accused person on
Bail. What is interesting to analyse is the balance between right to liberty as defined under the
Constitution of India as well as the principles of law in so far as commission of Non-Bailable
offences is concerned. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the matter of Shahzad Hasan Khan v.
Ishtiaq Hasan Khan has observed that "Liberty is to be secured through process of law, which is
administered keeping in mind the interests of the accused, the near and dear of the victim who
lost his life and who feel helpless and believe that there is no justice in the world as also the
collective interest of the community so that parties do not lose faith in the institution and indulge
in private retribution."

The aim of arresting a person accused of having committed a crime is to ensure that he/she does
not escape the rigours of law, when proved guilty or that the accused person does not tamper
with the prosecution evidence. While dealing with the issue of grant of bail in non-bailable
offences, it has been held that a person is entitled to his liberty even in case he/ she is accused of
a Non-Bailable offence and the right of an accused person should not be dealt with by a court in
a superficial manner. In fact, CrPC provides that in case the court has sufficient reason to believe
that the case in hand requires further investigation to prove the guilt of the accused; such person
should be enlarged on bail.

It has also been the opinion of courts that since right to liberty is an imperative right of a person,
an application seeking Bail should not be decided in a mechanical and perfunctory manner. It is
also relevant to point out that there may be instances when a woman is detained for being an
accused of committing a Non-Bailable offence. It has been held by various courts that releasing a
woman accused of having committed a Non-Bailable offence on special grounds is not
discriminatory. In the matter of Mst. Chokhi v. State, a woman accused of committing murder of
her one child was released on bail as there was no one to look after her other child at home.
Further, it has been the opinion of courts at large that where the prosecution is unable to persuade
the court that there is any reasonable ground for believing that the accused person is guilty of
commission of a Non-Bailable offence, in such case the accused person should be released on
Bail. Even in cases where the person is accused of having committed an offence under Section
307 is enlarged on Bail owing to ill-health. However, it is necessary to appreciate that there is no
specific rule as to when Bail should be granted. It has been the view of the courts that where a
Non- Bailable offence is not punishable with life imprisonment or with death sentence, Bail
should generally be granted and liberty of an accused should not be compromised with.

Having said so, it may be pointed out that courts have abstained from enlarging an accused on
bail in cases punishable with death sentence. The Delhi High Court laid down certain guidelines
to be kept in mind while granting bail. Though it is settled position of law that grant of Bail in
Non-Bailable offences is the discretion of a court and that the court dealing with grant of bail is
to only satisfy if there is a prima facie case against the accused. However, it has been time and
again held by various courts that the said discretion is to be exercised in a judicious manner and
not as a matter of course. Further, it has also been categorically held that an order enlarging an
accused person on Bail without any cogent reason cannot be sustained.