No Fetter On Trial Court's Power To Alter Charges Merely Because Prosecution Moved Application U/S 216 CrPC: Jharkhand High Court

The Jharkhand High Court has held that although neither the prosecution nor the accused has a vested right to seek alteration or addition of charges under Section 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the trial court's power to do so is not curtailed merely because the issue is brought to its notice through an application filed by either party. The Court observed that the power under Section 216 CrPC remains exclusively that of the court and can be exercised at any stage before pronouncement of judgment if warranted by the materials on record.A Single Judge Bench of Justice Pradeep Kumar Srivastava was hearing a criminal revision challenging an order of the Additional Sessions Judge-I, Garhwa, allowing the prosecution's application under Section 216 CrPC to frame additional charges under Sections 328 and 302/34 IPC against the accused.The prosecution case arose from the death of Savita Devi, who was allegedly subjected to cruelty by her in-laws after marriage. It was alleged that the accused forcibly administered poison mixed with sattu to her, leading to her death.Although the FIR was registered under Sections 328 and 302/34 IPC, the investigating officer ultimately submitted a chargesheet only under Section 306 IPC. Charges were accordingly framed under Section 306 IPC in 2017. During trial, however, the prosecution moved an application under Section 216 CrPC seeking addition of charges under Sections 328 and 302/34 IPC. The trial court allowed the application after considering the evidence that had emerged during trial.Before the High Court, the petitioners contended that Section 216 CrPC does not confer any right upon either the prosecution or the accused to seek alteration of charges and that the trial court committed an illegality by entertaining the prosecution's application. The State, on the other hand, submitted that while the power under Section 216 CrPC is vested solely in the court, there is no legal prohibition against a party bringing relevant material to the court's notice through an application.Examining Section 216 CrPC, the High Court observed that the provision empowers the trial court to alter or add charges at any time before judgment is pronounced. The Court noted that the expression “add to any charge” includes framing an entirely new charge where the evidence so warrants.The Bench further held that there is no fetter on the exercise of this power merely because the issue is raised by one of the parties. The Bench held:“It appears that there is no fitter on the power of the Court simply because the addition/alteration of charge has been sought for, by the parties by filing an application. But at the same time, the reliance placed upon the Judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of P. Kartikalakshmi (supra) by the petitioner, wherein the application for addition of charge was filed by the prosecution, was rejected by the concerned trial Court, thereafter, revision was filed by the prosecution and assailed up to the Hon'ble Supreme Court and it was reiterated that there is no vested right in the parties to seek invocation of Section 216 Cr.P.C.” Applying the law to the facts of the case, the Court noted that the FIR itself contained allegations of administering poisonous substance mixed with sattu, the prosecution's eye-witness had supported the allegation during trial, and the FSL report also indicated the presence of highly poisonous substance in the deceased's viscera.In these circumstances, the Court found that the trial court had independently considered the material on record before directing addition of charges under Sections 328 and 302/34 IPC.Holding that the order did not suffer from any illegality, the High Court dismissed the criminal revision.Case Title: Nagendra Pandey & Ors. v. State of Jharkhand & Ors.Case Number: Criminal Revision No. 1050 of 2022Appearance: Mr. Deepak Kr. Dubey, Mrs. Rakhi Sharma, Mrs. Ruhi Dubey, and Ms. Aparna Sharma for the Petitioners. Mr. Gautam Rakesh for the State.Click Here To Read/Download Order

No Fetter On Trial Court's Power To Alter Charges Merely Because Prosecution Moved Application U/S 216 CrPC: Jharkhand High Court

Rushil Batra

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Rushil Batra

No Fetter On Trial Court's Power To Alter Charges Merely Because Prosecution Moved Application U/S 216 CrPC: Jharkhand High Court

Rushil Batra

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

Rushil Batra

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers