Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR
RAMESH SINHA, CJ., BIBHU DATTA GURU
Union of India Through National Investigation Agency – Appellant
Versus
Dinesh Tati, S/o. Masa Tati – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual background of the case. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 2. arguments regarding the trial court's rejection of the application. (Para 5 , 6 , 7 , 8) |
| 3. court observations on the application of section 306 and relevant case law. (Para 9 , 10 , 11 , 14 , 15 , 17) |
| 4. ratio decidendi concerning the role of accomplice testimony. (Para 12 , 16) |
| 5. conclusion and order remanding the matter for reconsideration. (Para 18 , 19) |
Judgment :
Ramesh Sinha , CJ.
1. Heard Mr. B.Gopa Kumar and Mr. Himanshu Pandey, learned counsel for the appellant / Union of India.
2. As per the office report dated 21.04.2025, it transpires that the notice has been served to the respondent on 29.03.2025 and the matter has been taken up today, but on behalf of the respondent, no counsel is present to contest the present appeal filed by the Union of India, hence Court proceeds to hear the matter.
3. The appeal is preferred by the appellant against the order dated 07.02.2025, passed by the learned NIA Special Court, Jagdalpur refusing the application filed under Section 306(1) of Cr.P.C. (343 of the BNSS) for grant of permissions to tender pardon to one of the accused persons-cum-surrendered naxal.
4. Brief facts of the
Court clarified the procedure for granting pardon to accomplices under Section 306 Cr.P.C., emphasizing its critical role in prosecuting serious offenses while ensuring adherence to legal standards.
The provisions of Section 306(4)(a) of the Cr.P.C. are not attracted if an accused is tendered pardon after the commitment by the Court to which the proceeding is committed in exercise of powers unde....
The court established that a trial court should not prejudge the merits of evidence when considering an application for granting pardon under Section 306 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Revisional power under Section 397 read with Section 401 Cr.P.C. can be exercised by the Court suo-motu particularly to examine the correctness, legality or propriety of any finding, sentence or orde....
The grant of pardon is within the exclusive domain of the Court and is subject to the condition that the proposed approver makes a full and true disclosure of the circumstances within their knowledge....
Secrecy of crime and paucity of evidence, solely for the apprehension of the other offenders, recovery of the incriminating objects and production of the evidence otherwise unobtainable might afford ....
The court ruled that a second application for pardon under Section 306 of the Cr.P.C. is maintainable only on changed circumstances, and recording a confession statement prior to granting pardon is i....
On forfeiture of pardon, an accomplice is relegated to the position of an accused.
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
