The appellants are convicted and sentenced for offences under Sections 143, 147, 148, 323, 324 and 307 read with Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code for short). The Court below framed a charge against the accused which is extracted below:

"That on 4-9-1998 at 18.30 hours on the road near the U.P. School building at Kuttikunnuparamba, Pokkoth Theru accused 1 to 14 and about 10 others, who could be identified on sight armed with deadly weapons formed themselves into an unlawful assembly and in furtherance of their common object of causing the death of C.Ws.1 and 2 stabbed them with knife and beat them with wooden stick, iron rod and hands and thereafter about 250 metres away from the place of occurrence, near building No. XX-272 of Thaliparamba Municipality the accused beat C.W.3 with an iron crowbar and stabbed him with knife and inflicted injuries on C.Ws.1 to 3 and attempted to commit murder and thereby you all the accused have committed the offences punishable under Sections 143,147,148,323,324 and 307 r/w Section 149 I.P.C. within the cognizance of this court; and I hereby direct that you be tried before this court for the said offence."

2. A reading of the above charge itself would reveal that the charge is not framed in conformity with any of the relevant provisions of the Code relating to framing of charge. Section 212 of the Code of Criminal Procedure ('the Code', for short) provides that particulars as to time, place and person against whom the offence was committed shall be stated in the charge. Sub-section (1) of Section 212 of the code reveals that the charge "SHALL" contain such particulars [as to the time and place of the alleged offence, and the person (if any) against whom, it was committed] as are reasonably sufficient to give the accused notice of the matter with which he is charged. Section 218 of the Code provides that for every distinct offence of which any person is accused, there shall be a separate charge.

3. Section 211 of the Code deals with form of charges and contents of charge. The Form of Charge referred to in Section 211 of the Code is available in Form No. 32 in Schedule II of the Code. It reveals that the details of each offence are to be stated with reference to the particular accused who committed the offence and the person against whom such offence is committed. It also shows that if the charge is having two or more heads, each charge must be separately detailed. Legislature intended that the court shall frame charge in such a way that the charge shall contain the necessary details of the distinct offence or offences which include date, time and place where the offence is committed and the person who committed the offence and the person against whom such offence is committed. But, the charge framed in this case is, evidently, not in compliance with the mandatory provisions contained in the Code and hence, it is illegal.

4. The provisions relating to the charge are mainly founded on the valuable right of the accused to have a fair trial in criminal cases. Those provisions are intended to ensure that no accused is prejudiced in his defence, in the absence of his knowing the real nature of allegations made against him. Those provisions are laid down to guarantee that the accused is given notice of at least the bare minimum details of the alleged acts committed by him against a particular person, for effectively defending himself. Those provisions are also set on the Principles of Natural Justice.

5. It is also relevant to mention here that if the charge is not framed in accordance with the provisions of the Code, not only the accused, but the prosecution is also likely to be prejudiced because, the defect in the charge may lead to an unmerited acquittal. This is because of the reason that in certain cases, the defect in the charge may by itself vitiate the entire trial and a defective charge could be the sole reason for an acquittal. Hence, every court shall take personal effort to see t