Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Searching Case Laws & Precedent on Legal Query.....!
Analysing the retrieved Case Laws
Scanned Judgements…!
Mandatory Procedure Under Section 244 Cr.P.C. Section 244 mandates that when an accused appears before a Magistrate in a warrant case, the Magistrate must proceed to hear the prosecution and record all evidence supporting it before framing charges or making any discharge decision. The section emphasizes that the evidence must be taken or produced at this stage, and the accused's rights to cross-examination and defense are integral (Sources: ["PREETHA G. D/O GOAPALAKRISHNAN VS RAVEENDRA PANIKER S/O NOT KNOWN - Kerala"], ["Ram Lal Verma VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"], ["Aziz Fatima @ Aziz Fatma VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"], ["Bithika Chakraborty VS Kamal Kanti Biswas - Calcutta"]).
Timing of Discharge and Framing of Charges The Magistrate can discharge the accused if, after considering all evidence under Section 244, no case is made out that would warrant conviction. Discharge can occur even before the evidence is fully led or before the accused is formally charged, provided the Magistrate records reasons that no case exists (Sources: ["PREETHA G. D/O GOAPALAKRISHNAN VS RAVEENDRA PANIKER S/O NOT KNOWN - Kerala"], ["Aasharam Gond, S/o. Late Mantram Gond VS Bihariram Sahu, S/o. Sewakram Sahu - Chhattisgarh"], ["Ram Lal Verma VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"], ["Aziz Fatima @ Aziz Fatma VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"], ["B. Chandrashekar VS P. Ashok Kumar - Telangana"]).
Power to Discharge Under Section 245(2) Section 245(2) allows the Magistrate to discharge the accused at any previous stage of the case, which includes stages before the completion of evidence under Section 244. This power can be exercised before the accused appears or evidence is led, and the decision must be supported by recorded reasons (Sources: ["Aasharam Gond, S/o. Late Mantram Gond VS Bihariram Sahu, S/o. Sewakram Sahu - Chhattisgarh"], ["Aziz Fatima @ Aziz Fatma VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"], ["Unni Mukundan, S/o. Mukundan VS State Of Kerala - Kerala"], ["KSHETRIYA ADHIKARI vs MS. SHARDA ENERGY AND MINERALS LTD. - Chhattisgarh"]).
Stage of Evidence and Discharge The evidence referred to in Section 244 includes all evidence produced in support of the prosecution. The Magistrate's decision to discharge or frame charges depends on whether sufficient material exists to proceed further. This decision can be made even before the full evidence is recorded, but after the initial stages of proceedings, such as summons or warrant execution (Sources: ["PREETHA G. D/O GOAPALAKRISHNAN VS RAVEENDRA PANIKER S/O NOT KNOWN - Kerala"], ["Ram Lal Verma VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"], ["Aziz Fatima @ Aziz Fatma VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"], ["Bithika Chakraborty VS Kamal Kanti Biswas - Calcutta"], ["B. Chandrashekar VS P. Ashok Kumar - Telangana"]).
Legal Precedents and Judicial Interpretation Courts have clarified that the stage of Section 244 is not endless; the Magistrate's power to discharge under Section 245(2) is exercisable at any previous stage, including before evidence is fully recorded. The right of cross-examination and the opportunity to lead evidence are fundamental rights during this stage, and the Magistrate must record reasons when exercising the power to discharge (Sources: ["Unni Mukundan, S/o. Mukundan VS State Of Kerala - Kerala"], ["KSHETRIYA ADHIKARI vs MS. SHARDA ENERGY AND MINERALS LTD. - Chhattisgarh"], ["Aziz Fatima @ Aziz Fatma VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"]).
The reading of Section 244 Cr.P.C. establishes that the stage of recording evidence is crucial for framing charges or discharging the accused. However, the Magistrate's power to discharge under Section 245(2) can be exercised even before the evidence under Section 244 is fully recorded, provided it occurs at a previous stage of the case. This ensures that the Magistrate can prevent unnecessary trials when no prima facie case exists, safeguarding the rights of the accused. The decision to discharge must be backed by reasons, and the process involves a careful assessment of the evidence available at that stage.
References:- ["PREETHA G. D/O GOAPALAKRISHNAN VS RAVEENDRA PANIKER S/O NOT KNOWN - Kerala"]- ["Aasharam Gond, S/o. Late Mantram Gond VS Bihariram Sahu, S/o. Sewakram Sahu - Chhattisgarh"]- ["Ram Lal Verma VS State of U. P. - Allahabad"]- ["Aziz Fatima @ Aziz Fatma VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand"]- ["Unni Mukundan, S/o. Mukundan VS State Of Kerala - Kerala"]- ["KSHETRIYA ADHIKARI vs MS. SHARDA ENERGY AND MINERALS LTD. - Chhattisgarh"]- ["Bithika Chakraborty VS Kamal Kanti Biswas - Calcutta"]- ["B. Chandrashekar VS P. Ashok Kumar - Telangana"]
In criminal proceedings under the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, procedural safeguards ensure fairness, especially in warrant cases instituted otherwise than on a police report. A common query arises: 244 Crpc Chief will be Read against Accused – likely referring to whether the charge (possibly misspelled as 'Chief') under Section 244 CrPC is read out to the accused at this stage. Typically, no – Section 244 focuses on taking prosecution evidence before framing charges. This blog post delves into the nuances, key principles, practical applications, and relevant case law to clarify this process.
Whether you're an accused facing trial, a legal practitioner, or someone navigating India's criminal justice system, understanding Section 244 is crucial for protecting rights and ensuring procedural justice. Note: This is general information and not specific legal advice; consult a qualified lawyer for your case.
Section 244 CrPC applies to warrant cases not instituted on a police report, marking the pre-charge evidence stage. Here's a breakdown:
This stage is pivotal as it allows the Magistrate to assess if a prima facie case exists, potentially leading to discharge under Section 245 rather than framing charges under Section 246.
Several principles underpin this provision, emphasizing fairness and judicial discretion:
Evidence Before Charge: All evidence at this stage determines whether charges should be framed. The Magistrate evaluates if a prima facie case is made out against the accused. Cr.P.C. only upon satisfaction that a prima facie case is made out against the accused. Arun Gupta VS J. P. Meena - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1467
Accused's Right to Cross-Examine: The accused has a fundamental right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses under Section 244. This ensures a fair trial and lets the defense challenge evidence early. In Ajoy Kumar Ghose v. State of Jharkhand, the Supreme Court stressed this right's importance. Dip Narayan VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand (2022)Vijay Dhanuka etc. VS Najima Mamtaj etc. - Supreme Court (2014)PRATAP SINGH SHISHODIA VS STATE - Allahabad (1987)
Magistrate's Discretion: Summoning witnesses is discretionary but must be exercised judiciously for justice, not arbitrarily. Reasons should be recorded. Dip Narayan VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand (2022)SADDIQ VS STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH - Allahabad (1980)
These rights prevent premature charges and miscarriages of justice.
In practice, the process unfolds as follows:
Contrast this with summons cases, where discharge follows Section 251, not 245. The application for discharge under Section 245 is not maintainable as this pertains to warrant cases and the correct procedure is to apply Section 251, which governs summons cases. Arun Gupta VS J. P. Meena - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1467
Post-244 evidence, if a case exists, charges are framed under Section 246: The charge shall then be read and explained to the accused, and he shall be asked whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make. Ramashray Yadav VS State of U. P. - 2024 Supreme(All) 2070 Note – charge reading happens after Section 244, not during it.
Rejection of discharge doesn't need detailed reasons; a prima facie case suffices. The rejection of a discharge application under Section 245 Cr.P.C. does not require detailed reasoning; only a prima facie case must be established for proceeding with the trial. Ramashray Yadav VS State of U. P. - 2024 Supreme(All) 2070
Judicial precedents illuminate Section 244's application:
Ajoy Kumar Ghose v. State of Jharkhand: The Supreme Court highlighted the Magistrate's duty to evaluate evidence and the accused's cross-examination right. Discretion to summon witnesses must be reasoned. Dip Narayan VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand (2022)
Shoraj Singh Ahlawat & Others v. State of U.P.: In a case with evidence under Section 244 leading to charges under Sections 420/120-B IPC, courts can discharge if no conviction possibility exists based on prosecution evidence alone. Defense materials aren't considered at charge stage. Sunil Kumar Gupta VS State of Uttarakhand - 2017 Supreme(UK) 170
Discharge Rejection Cases: Courts affirm that rejecting discharge under 245/246 needs only prima facie assessment, not elaborate reasons. A writ challenging such rejection was dismissed. Ramashray Yadav VS State of U. P. - 2024 Supreme(All) 2070
Other cases, like those involving charge alterations under Section 216, underscore procedural fairness but are tangential – e.g., altered charges need explanation unless implicit in originals. Malsawmkima, S/o B. Dorema VS State of Mizoram - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 376Malsawmkima VS State of Mizoram - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 379
In murder trials, de novo examination post-charge under Section 246 was scrutinized, but Section 244 evidence remains foundational. Ajijul Sk. Alias Dafadar Alias Choto Miya VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL - 2012 Supreme(Cal) 132
Section 244 is exclusive to warrant cases sans police report. In summons cases or police-report warrant cases (Sections 238-243), procedures differ:
| Aspect | Warrant (Non-Police Report) - Sec 244 | Summons Cases - Sec 251 ||--------|---------------------------------------|-------------------------|| Evidence Stage | Prosecution evidence before charge | Substance of accusation read; plea taken || Discharge | Sec 245 after evidence | Post-plea if no case || Charge Reading | Post-244 under Sec 246 | At outset under Sec 251 |
Misapplying sections, as in summons discharge via 245, leads to quashing. Arun Gupta VS J. P. Meena - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1467
At trial's advanced stages, like post-244 evidence, bail considerations weigh conflicting witness roles. PHOOL CHAND VS STATE - 2007 Supreme(Del) 2162
Section 244 CrPC ensures robust pre-charge scrutiny in warrant cases, safeguarding accused rights without reading charges at this juncture – that occurs later under Section 246. By mandating prosecution evidence and cross-examination, it promotes justice. Key takeaways:
Adhering to these provisions upholds fair trials. For personalized guidance, seek professional legal counsel.
References:- Dip Narayan VS State of Jharkhand - Jharkhand (2022)Vijay Dhanuka etc. VS Najima Mamtaj etc. - Supreme Court (2014)PRATAP SINGH SHISHODIA VS STATE - Allahabad (1987)RENJITH PANNACKAL S/O P. K. ITTIKUNJU VS STATE OF KERALA - Kerala (2022)Arun Gupta VS J. P. Meena - 2023 Supreme(P&H) 1467Ramashray Yadav VS State of U. P. - 2024 Supreme(All) 2070Sunil Kumar Gupta VS State of Uttarakhand - 2017 Supreme(UK) 170Malsawmkima, S/o B. Dorema VS State of Mizoram - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 376Malsawmkima VS State of Mizoram - 2019 Supreme(Gau) 379Ajijul Sk. Alias Dafadar Alias Choto Miya VS STATE OF WEST BENGAL - 2012 Supreme(Cal) 132PHOOL CHAND VS STATE - 2007 Supreme(Del) 2162
#CrPC244, #WarrantCases, #AccusedRights
The procedures after taking evidence under Section 244 of Cr.P.C. have been stated under Sections 245 and 246 of Cr.P.C. and Section 244 of Cr.P.C. provides as under: “244. ... (2) The charge shall then be read and explained to the accused, and he shall be asked whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make. ... On evaluating the evidence given....
At this juncture, it would be appropriate to reproduce the relevant provisions of Code of Criminal Procedure, i.e., Section 244 & 245 of Cr.PC, which reads as under :- “Section 244. ... Perusal of Section 244 of CrPC clearly shows that when, in any warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report, the accused appears or brought before the Magistrate, then the Magistrate shall pr....
the next stage is only the appearance of the accused before the Magistrate in a warrant case under Section 244 Cr.P.C. and the Magistrate can take decision under Section 245(2) before the accused is brought before the Court or before the evidence is led under Section 244, Cr.P.C. ... Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. dealt with power of trial court discharging an accused....
Cr.P.C. only upon satisfaction that a prima facie case is made out against the accused. ... Since there is no express provision or prohibition in this regard in the Code of Criminal Procedure, these directions are being issued in exercise of power under Section 482 read with Section 483 Cr.P.C. and Article 227 of the Constitution to secure the ends of justice; to ... Cr.PC xxxxxxxxxxx Section 245....
244 (1) of Code of Criminal Procedure has not been completed. ... The Magistrate can take this decision before the accused appears or is brought before the Court or the evidence is led under Section 244 Cr.P.C. The words appearing in Section 245(2) Cr.P.C. "at any previous stage of the case", clearly bring out this position. ... The plain reading of Section 244 and 245 ....
The Trial Court permitted the petitioner to cross-examine the witnesses under Section 244 Cr.P.C. The petitioner filed CMP No.2497/2019 under Section 245(1) Cr.P.C seeking discharge. ... The scheme of trial in the case of a warrant-case instituted otherwise than on a police report is dealt with in Sections 244 to 250 of Cr.P.C. Sections 244 to 246 are the relevant provisions in the prese....
The Magistrate can take this decision before the accused appears or is brought before the court or the evidence is led under Section 244 CrPC. The previous stage would be before the evidence of the prosecution under Section 244(1) CrPC is completed or any stage prior to that. ... Previous stage could be from Sections 200 to 204 CrPC and till the completion of the evidence of prosecution ....
Therefore Section 244 Cr.P.C has mandated the Magistrate to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. ... Therefore it is required that Section 244 of the Cr.P.C, be also looked into, to see what kind of evidence has been enumerated therein, for the Magistrate to take into consideration while delivering an order under Section 245 (1). “244. Evidence for prosecution. ... #HL_....
Thereafter, charges were framed under Section 239 of Cr.P.C. by the learned Magistrate for the offence under Section 420 read with 34 of IPC against the accused Nos.1 and 2 on 07.02.2023. 4. ... The Magistrate was of the opinion that there are grounds for presuming that the accused has committed an offence for which reason charges were framed and read over to the accused. 7. ... , wher....
(2) The charge shall then be read and explained to the accused, and he shall be asked whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make. ... Section 246 of the Cr.P.C. clearly provides that in case evidence under Section 244 Cr.P.C. has been taken or at any previous stage of the case, the Magistrate opines that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence, t....
In the present case, there is no additional charge framed against the petitioner. However, the charge had been altered from the more serious charge of Section 6 of the POCSO Act to the lesser charge of Section 354B IPC. Section 216(2) CrPC no doubt requires that every alteration or addition of charge shall be read and explained to the accused. The charge framed earlier under Section 6 of the POCSO Act had also included within it the offence of using criminal force for disrobi....
In the present case, there is no additional charge framed against the petitioner. The charge framed earlier under Section 6 of the POCSO Act had also included within it the offence of using criminal force for disrobing the victim girl to make her naked under Section 354B IPC. Section 216(2) CrPC no doubt requires that every alteration or addition of charge shall be read and explained to the accused. However, the charge had been altered from the more serious charge of Section ....
Evidence was adduced by the complainant under Section 244 Cr.P.C. charge under Section 420 IPC read with Section 120-B IPC was framed against the accused by the trial court.
The procedure for offering the witnesses for cross-examination after framing of the charge has been laid down in section 246 Cr.P.C. in respect of warrant cases instituted other wise than on police report. Therefore, the learned trial Court followed the correct procedure in permitting examination-in-chief de novo. But even in those cases the witnesses are examined-in-chief under section 244 of the Code of Criminal Procedure in the presence of the accused. Court cannot as a ma....
( 1 ) THIS application under Section 439 Cr. P. C. read with Section 482 cr. P. C. has been made on behalf of the accused, who is facing trial under section 307 read with Section 34 IPC and Section 302 IPC. The trial in this case is at fag end, all material witnesses have been recorded. The counsel for the applicant has relied upon statement of two witnesses and submitted that no role has been assigned to the applicant.
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
