At the discharge stage, courts must only assess whether there is prima facie evidence for proceeding with charges, without weighing the evidence as in a trial.

ORDER

Petitioner is accused No.24 in Crime No.1989 of 2021 registered at the Palakkad Town South Police Station, now pending as S.C.No.662 of 2022 on the files of the District and Sessions Court, Palakkad. As per the prosecution case, deceased Sanjith, an RSS worker, was attacked with dangerous weapons such as swords, sticks etc. by about 8:45 am on 15.11.2021, while he was travelling on a motor cycle with his wife. Sanjith succumbed to the injuries immediately and the assailants escaped in a car. Initially, crime was registered for offences punishable under Section 302 read with Section 34 of IPC against five identifiable persons. Subsequently, offences under Sections 143 , 144, 147, 148, 341, 302, 120-B, 109, 118, 201, 212, 114, 115, 116 465, 471 and 34 read with Section 149 of and Section 27 (3) read with Sections 7 (a) and (b) of the Arms Act were incorporated. After completing investigation, final report was filed in court arraigning 10 persons as accused. Thereafter, supplementary final reports were filed and petitioner was arrayed as accused in the third supplementary final report. After committal of the case, petitioner filed a petition for discharge under Section 227 of Cr.P.C. The court below having dismissed the petition vide Annexure 4 order, this Crl.M.C is filed.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner contended that the materials produced by the prosecution are thoroughly insufficient to implicate the petitioner. This crucial aspect was not considered by the trial court while rejecting the petition for discharge. Referring to Annexure 3 order of this Court, by which the petitioner was granted bail, it is argued that the observations therein should have prompted the trial court to scrutinise the materials produced by the prosecution. On the other hand, the petition for discharge was dismissed based only on the prosecution allegations.

3. Learned Public Prosecutor submitted that the allegations are grave and the evidence gathered by the prosecution is sufficient to prove the petitioner's role. He is the major player involved in the planning and execution of the murder. According to the public prosecutor, the petition for discharge was rejected after analysing the evidence and not merely based on the prosecution allegations.

4. A close reading of Section 227 of the Code leaves no room for doubt that, for deciding whether the accused is to be discharged, court is required to consider only the records of the case and documents submitted by the prosecution. At the stage of discharge, court cannot make a roving enquiry into the pros and cons of the matter and weigh the evidence as if it was conducting a trial. The legal position in this regard is succinctly laid down by the Apex Court in State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh [(1977) 4 SCC 39], the relevant portion of which reads as under;

“4. Under Section 226 of the Code while opening the case for the prosecution the Prosecutor has got to describe the charge against the accused and state by what evidence he proposes to prove the guilt of the accused. Thereafter comes at the initial stage the duty of the Court to consider the record of the case and the documents submitted therewith and to hear the submissions of the accused and the prosecution in that behalf. The Judge has to pass thereafter an order either under Section 227 or Section 228 of the Code. If “the Judge considers that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused, he shall discharge the accused and record his reasons for so doing”, as enjoined by Section 227 . If, on the other hand, “the Judge is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence which— … (b) is exclusively triable by the Court, he shall frame in writing a charge against the accused”, as provided in Section 228 . Reading the two provisions together in juxtaposition, as they have got to be, it would be clear that at the beginning and the initial stage of the trial the truth, veracity and eff