SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2026 Supreme(SC) 327

AHSANUDDIN AMANULLAH, R. MAHADEVAN
Sandeep Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Satish – Respondent


Advocates appeared:
For the Petitioner(s): Mr. Kartikeya Bhargava, AOR
For the Respondent(s): Ms. Veera Kaul Singh, AOR Mr. Attau Rahman Masoodi, Sr. Adv. Mr. Adarsh Kumar Pandey, Adv. Mr. Arun Kanwa, Adv. Mr. Rohan Wadhwa, Adv. Mr. Mithilesh Kumar Jaiswal, Adv. Mr. Birender Kumar Mishra, Adv. Mr. Gautam Barnwal, Adv. Mr. Ali Abbas Masoodi, Adv. Mr. Alok Kumar, Adv. Mr. Varun Rawat, Adv. Ms. Manisha, Adv. Mr. Mukesh Kumar, AOR Mr. Vishwajit Singh, Sr. Adv. Mrs. Veera Kaul Singh, Adv. Mr. Pankaj Singh, AOR Mr. Vignesh Singh, Adv. Ms. Ruchira Goel, AOR

Judgement Key Points

Key Points: - Procedural defects in framing charges are curable and do not vitiate trial unless they result in demonstrated prejudice or failure of justice. (!) (!) - Charges were framed on 27.03.2009 (unsigned due to absence of one accused) and recorded as framed on 01.06.2009 with all accused present; trial proceeded for 14+ years with extensive cross-examination. (!) (!) (!) - Trial court cured defect by framing fresh charges on 11.09.2024 and allowed trial to continue on existing evidence on 07.10.2024, noting no prejudice to accused and death of key witnesses. (!) (!) - High Court set aside trial court's order and directed de novo trial under Sections 241-242 Cr.P.C. (!) (!) - Supreme Court held substantial compliance with charge framing as accused were aware of accusations and actively defended without objection or prejudice. (!) (!) (!) - Defects in charge (e.g., unsigned order) are irregularities under Sections 215 and 464 Cr.P.C., not fatal absent failure of justice. (!) (!) - No prejudice shown; accused participated fully, cross-examined witnesses, raised no timely objection. (!) (!) - De novo trial unwarranted after substantial progress (14+ years, evidence recorded, key witnesses deceased); prejudices prosecution. (!) (!) - Supreme Court set aside High Court order, restored trial court order, directed expeditious conclusion. (!)

Whether there was substantial compliance with the requirement of framing of charges in accordance with law? [p_62]

Whether the defect, if any, in the framing or signing of the charges constitutes an illegality vitiating the trial, or a curable irregularity within the meaning of Sections 215 and 464 Cr.P.C.? [p_78]

Whether the High Court was justified in directing that the trial be conducted afresh, despite the fact that the trial had substantially progressed and prosecution evidence had already been recorded? [p_102]


Table of Content
1. facts of the case established. (Para 2 , 3)
2. arguments regarding trial process and charges framing. (Para 4 , 5 , 6 , 7)
3. court's reasoning on the validity of charges and procedural compliance. (Para 11 , 12 , 13 , 14 , 15 , 16)
4. conclusion restoring trial court's order. (Para 18 , 19)

JUDGMENT :

R. MAHADEVAN, J.

1. Leave granted.

2. The present Criminal Appeal arises out of the order dated 18.02.2025 passed by the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad1 [Hereinafter referred to as “the High Court”] in an application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732 [For short “Cr.P.C.”] being Application No. 39342 of 2024. By the impugned order, the High Court allowed the application filed by Respondents 1 to 5 (accused persons), set aside the order dated 07.10.2024 passed by the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No. 5 Aligarh3 [Hereinafter referred to as “the trial Court”] in Sessions Trial No. 21 of 2008, and directed that the trial be proceeded afresh in accordance with the mandate of Sections 241 and 242 Cr.P.C.

3. Briefly stated, the facts giving rise to the present appeal are as follows:

    3.1. An FIR being No. 5 of 2007 was registered on

        Click Here to Read the rest of this document
        1
        2
        3
        4
        5
        6
        7
        8
        9
        10
        11
        SupremeToday Portrait Ad
        supreme today icon
        logo-black

        An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

        Please visit our Training & Support
        Center or Contact Us for assistance

        qr

        Scan Me!

        India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

        For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

        whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
        whatsapp-icon Back to top