Back
Next 
ORISSA HIGH COURT
B. K. Behera, J.
Sambhunath Puhan-Petitioner
versus
State-Respondent
Criminal Revision No. 287 of 1984
Decided on 26.7.1984
M/s. M. N. Das and M. M. Das, Advocates-For the Petitioner.
Mr. A. Rath, Addl. Standing Counsel–For the Opposite party.
Mr. A. Rath, Addl. Standing Counsel–For the Opposite party.
IMPORTANT POINT
An accused can be convicted for an offence for which he was not charged only after giving him due notice of such offence and after according him adequate opportunity to defend himself against this fresh charge.
Headnote:Criminal Procedure Code 1973, Section 401-Revision-Section 21l-Framing of charge, Indian Penal Code 1860, Section 504 and Section 324-Charge framed against petitioner under Section 324 Indian Penal Code-Trial Court convicted petitioner under Section 504 without giving him any notice of the accusation and any opportunity to defend himself Whether in these circumstances the conviction of the petitioner can be upheld? (No) (Para 4)
Sambhunath Puhan VS State
