Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Jagmohan Bansal , J.
Amrinder Pal Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of Punjab & Anr. – Respondents
CRM-M-19269-2020
Decided On : 14-12-2022
Amendment of Charge - Criminal Procedure Code - Section 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC - The court discussed the power to alter or add charges under Section 216 of the Cr.P.C. and emphasized that the court has the discretion to alter or add charges at any time before judgment. However, the court cannot make out a new case or change the heart and soul of the charge sheet. The judgment highlighted the importance of speedy trial as part of the right to equality and life and personal liberty guaranteed by the Constitution of India.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner sought setting aside of the order allowing the prosecution's application for amendment of the charge sheet, arguing that it amounted to the commencement of the trial from the initial stage and violated the right to a speedy trial guaranteed under Article 21 of the Constitution of India.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that the amendment of the charge sheet, which amounted to making a new case, after the prosecution and defense had closed their evidence and the matter was listed for final arguments, was not in the interest of justice and principles of a fair and speedy trial.
Issues: The issues involved the power of the court to alter or add charges under Section 216 of the Cr.P.C. and the impact of amending the charge sheet at a late stage of the trial on the right to a speedy trial.
Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that while the court has the discretion to alter or add charges, it cannot make out a new case or change the heart and soul of the charge sheet. The judgment highlighted the importance of speedy trial as part of the right to equality and life and personal liberty guaranteed by the Constitution of India.
Final Decision: The court quashed the order allowing the prosecution's application for amendment of the charge sheet.
JUDGMENT
Jagmohan Bansal, J. (Oral) - Through instant petition under Section 482 of Criminal Procedure Code, the petitioner is seeking setting aside of order dated 07.03.2020 (Annexure P-5) whereby the application of the prosecution for amendment of charge has been allowed.
2. The brief facts which are material and necessary for adjudication of present dispute are that on the complaint of Dalbir Singh, an FIR No.302 dated 10.09.2011 came to be registered against petitioner and his sister. The FIR was registered under Section 420, 467, 468, 471 of IPC. The police after completing investigation filed its final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The matter came up for consideration before Chief Judicial Magistrate, Amritsar who vide order dated 17.12.2013 (Annexure P-2) framed charges. For the ready reference, charge sheet is reproduced as below:
'1. That on or before 10.9.11, in the area of court HDFC Bank Mall Road, Asr you accused named above dishonestly cheated the complainant Dalbir Singh's daughter Gurbir Kaur by delivering her to forged Driving Licence and forged rent note and obtained the signatures of Gurbir Kaur on cheque and form and demanded Rs three lac on pretext of getting a job in the bank and thus you accused committed an offence punishable under section 420 IPC which is within my cognizance.
2. 2ndly, on the same date time and place, you obtained DL and rent note for providing job to Gurbir Kaur in the bank which are a valuable documents in order to cheat the complainant and thus you accused committed an offence punishable under Section 467 IPC which is within my cognizance.
3. 3rdly, on the same date time and place, you obtained DL and rent note for providing job to Gurbir Kaur in the bank which being a valuable document for the purpose of cheating and thus committed an offence punishable under section 468 IPC which is within my cognizance.
4. 4thly, on the same date and place, you accused obtained DL and rent note for providing job to Gurbir Kaur in the bank which are a valuable document and cheated the complainant by using the said document to be genuine and thus you both the accused committed an offence punishable under section 471 IPC which is within my cognizance which is within my cognizance."
3. The prosecution during the course of trial, led its evidence. The prosecution examined 11 witnesses and after completion of prosecution evidence, statement of petitioner under Section 313 was recorded on 25.09.2019. The present petitioner examined one witness as DW-1 on 18.12.2019. The matter was fixed for final arguments on 27.02.2020 and at this stage, the prosecution moved an application dated 27.02.2020 seeking amendment of charge sheet on the ground that charge sheet is not in consonance with the FIR. The present petitioner filed its reply contesting the application seeking amendment of charge sheet.
4. Learned trial Court, vide order dated 07.03.2020 allowed application of the prosecution and vide order dated 09.03.2020 framed fresh charge sheet. Relevant extracts of charge sheet dated 09.03.2020 are reproduced as below:
'1. That on or before 10.09.2011, you accused above named cheated Gurbir Kaur daughter of complainant Dalbir Singh by obtaining her signatures on some account opening form and cheques on the pretext of confirmation of your job in Kotak Mahindra Bank but thereafter issued legal notice demanding Rs. Three lac from Gurbir Kaur on the basis of aforesaid cheques and thereby you committed an offence punishable u/s 420 of IPC and within cognizance of this court.
2. Secondly on or before 10.09.2011, you accused above named forged driving license and rent note purported to be valuable securities in the name of Gurbir Kaur showing her as to be your wife and thus you accused committed an offence punishable u/s 467 of IPC and within cognizance of this court.
3. Thirdly on the same date and time, you accused forged driving license and rent note in the name of Gurbir Kaur intending that they shall be used for the pur
The court emphasized the importance of the right to a speedy trial as part of the right to equality and life and personal liberty guaranteed by the Constitution of India.
The power to alter the charge under Section 216 Cr.P.C. is exclusive to the Court and can be exercised at any time before the judgment is pronounced. The alteration must be founded on material availa....
The court has the power to alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced, and such alteration should be made to ensure a fair trial to the accused persons as well as to the vic....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the application of Section 216 of the Cr.P.C. and the court's power to alter or add charges at any time before the judgment is pronounced, ensuring....
The Court upheld its power under Section 216 of the CrPC to add charges upon prosecution request, emphasizing the trial's necessity and the end of justice.
The court established that it can alter charges under Section 216 CrPC based on evidence, ensuring no prejudice to the accused, even after the trial has commenced.
The trial Court can alter charges under Section 216 CrPC, and such alteration does not equate to deletion, allowing the trial to proceed under the new charge.
The court affirmed that while a Prosecutor can alert the court to charge deficiencies, only the court can alter charges, ensuring no prejudice to the accused.
The court clarified that the power to alter or add charges under Section 216 Cr.P.C. is solely within the discretion of the court, ensuring that the rights of the accused are protected and the trial ....
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
