Law and You >Procedural Laws > CrPC > Criminal Charge Under CrPC

One basic requirement of a fair trial in criminal jurisprudence is to give precise information to the accused as to the accusation against him. This is of significant value as it helps the accused in the preparation of his defence. In all trials under the Code, the accused is informed of the accusation in the beginning itself. In case of serious offences the Code requires that the accusations are to be formulated and reduced to writing with great precision and clarity. This ‘charge’ is then to be read and explained to the accused person. Thus, in a general sense the object of charge is enabling the accused to have an idea of what he is being tried for and why he is being tried. This is the stage where a criminal case splits into various paths, and leads to different types of conclusions. In this article, we shall discuss criminal charge under CrPC.

A charge is a written notice of the precise and specific accusation against the accused person which he is required to meet. It is the first notice to the person of the matter whereof he is accused and it must convey to him with sufficient clarity and certainty that the prosecution intends to prove against him and of which, he would have to clear himself. Its object is to warn the accused of the case, he is to answer.

What is Charge?

A ‘charge’ simply means an accusation. For the purposes of trial procedures, under the Code, it signifies a formal accusation in writing against a person that he committed an offence. The Code however does not define charge, but section 2(b) of the Code says that “Charge includes any head of charge when the charge contains more heads than one”

In order to understand the definition, it must be decoded and interpreted in its general sense. The provision says as to what included in the definition of Charge i.e., the definition is the inclusive one. For example: if a man commits several offences by his single act then all the offences are called heads of charge and all offences are individually and together are charge. Section 211 to 224 speaks about form and contents of charge and what a charge shall contain and Joinder of charges, alteration of charges etc…

Charge must be properly framed and evidence tendered must relate to matters stated in the charge. A charge is not an accusation in the abstract, but a concrete accusation of an offence alleged to have been committed by a person. The object being to enable the accused to know the case he will have to meet and to be ready before evidence is given.

In VC Shukla v. State through CBI, 1980 Cr. L.J, 690 (SC) case, the Apex Court held that charge serves the purpose of notice or intimation to the accused, drawn up according to specific language of law, giving clear and unambiguous or precise notice of the nature of accusation that the accused is called upon to meet in the course of trial

Essentials of a valid Charge:

Sections 211 & 212 specify about contents of charge and mentioning of particulars as to time and place of the alleged offence in the charge

Section 211 of the Code deals with contents of Charge and states that

1. Every charge under this Code shall state the offence with which the accused is charged
2. If the law which creates the offence gives it any specific name, the offence may be described in the charge by that name only.
3. If the law which creates the offence does not give it any specific name so much of the definition of the offence must be stated as to give the accused notice of the matter with which he is charged.
4. The law and section of the law against which the offence is said to have been committed shall be mentioned in the charge.
5. The fact that the charge is made is equivalent to a statement that every legal condition required by law to constitute the offence charged was fulfilled in the particular case
6. The charge shall be written in the language of the Court.
7. If the accused, having been previously convicted of any offence, is liable, by reason of such previous conviction, to enhanced punishment, or to punishment of a different kind, for a subsequent offence, and it is intended to prove such previous conviction for the purpose of affecting the punishment which the Court may think fit to award for the subsequent offence, the fact date and place of the previous, conviction shall be stated in the charge; and if such statement has been omitted, the Court may add it at any time before sentence is passed.

Section 212 of CrPC asserts the charge form shall contain:

1. The offence for which the accused is charged and the particulars like the time, place and the person against whom the offence is committed and giving to the accused the precise and clear notice of matter for which he is charged.
2. The exact time need not be mentioned in the charge form when the accused is charged with criminal breach of trust or dishonest misappropriation of money or any other movable property, it is sufficient if the gross sum is specified and the dates on which such alleged offence have been committed.

In Ranchhod Lal v. State of Madhya Pradesh, AIR 1965 SC 1248 case, the Court held that failure to mention the particulars precisely due to the nature of the information may not invalidate the proceedings.

• According to Section 213 of CrPC, when the nature of the case is such that the particulars mentioned in Section 211 and 212 do not give the accused sufficient notice of the matter with which he is charged, the charge shall contain such particulars of how the alleged offence is committed as will be sufficient for that purpose.
• According to Section 214 of CrPC, words used in charge to describe the offence shall be deemed to have used in the sense attached to them respectively by law under which such offence is punishable.
• According to Section 215 of CrPC, errors committed in stating either the offence or the particulars required to be stated in the charge or omitting to state offence or those particulars in charge, all these errors shall not be regarded as as material at any satge unless the accused was misled by such error or omission and it caused a failure of justice.
• According to Section 216 of CrPC, any court my alter or add to any charge at any time before pronouncing the judgement and every such altered or added charge shall be read and explained to the accused. In case if the court is of the opinion that proceeding immediately with the trial, after alteration or addition of charge, causes prejudice to the accused or prosecutor, then the court may either direct a new trial or adjourn the trial for such period as may be necessary. In case if the altered or added charge necessiates prosecution for previous sanction then the case shall not be proceeded with until such sanction is obtained for prosecution or unless the sanction was already obtained on same facts of altered or added charges.
• According to Section 217 of CrPC, whenever a charge is altered or added by the court ,after commencing trial on such altered or added charge, the court shall allow the accused or prosecutor to recall or reexamine any witnesses who were examined , by recording reasons.
• According to Section 218 of CrPC, for every distinct offence there shall be a separate charge and every such charge shall be tried separately.
• According to Section 219(1) of CrPC, if a person has been accused of three offences of the same kind, then the person can be tried for all the offences together if they have been committed within a span of twelve months from the first to the last offence. Section 219(2) of CrPC talks about the offences which are of the same kind, also punishable with the same quantum of punishment.
• If a person has committed a series of acts, which are so intrinsically connected together that they form a single transaction, such series of offences shall be charged and tried together. The word ‘transaction’ has not been defined under the Code.
• In case of offences of Criminal breach of trust or dishonest misappropriation of property and their companion offences of falsification of accounts. Many a time, the offences of criminal breach of trust or dishonest misappropriation of property are committed along with the offence such as falsification of accounts etc., the latter offence committed in order to fulfil the objective of the former offence. In such cases, Section 220(2) enables the Courts to try such offences together.
• Section 221 provides for the cases wherein there is some doubt related to the circumstances and incidents which took place during the commission of the offence. According to this section, if the accused has committed a series of acts which lead to confusion regarding the facts should be proved, the accused might be charged with any or all of such offences or charged for alternative offences. In such cases, the accused is charged for one offence and during the stage of evidence, if it is proved that he has committed a different offence, he may be convicted for the same even though he was not charged with the same.
• Section 223 talks about the class of persons who can be tried jointly. This section permits a joint trial of several persons under the specified circumstances as there exists some nexus among the various offences committed. The various classes shall not be treated as mutually exclusive and could be combined together if necessary. The accused persons whose cases have not been covered under any of the classes of Section 223, cannot himself claim a joint trial. The proviso to this Section puts a check on the discretionary power of the court. The rules contained from Section 218 to Section 223 have been made for the benefit of the accused. It is not required to treat the various classes of sections as mutually exclusive. The Courts have been given the authority to combine the provisions of more than two clauses. The joint trial of several persons partly by applying one clause and by partly applying another clause has also been authorised.
• Section 224 of CrPC states that when a charge containing more heads than one is framed against the same person, and when a conviction has been had on one or more of them, the complainant, or the officer conducting the prosecution, may, with the consent, of the Court, withdraw the remaining charge or charges, or the Court of its own accord may stay the inquiry into, or trial of, such charge or charges and such withdrawal shall have the effect of an acquittal on such charge or charges, unless the conviction be set aside, in which case the said Court (subject to the order of the Court setting aside the conviction) may proceed with the inquiry into, or trial of, the charge or charges so withdrawn. The section is applicable where the accused in convicted of one of several distinct charges before the other charges are tried. It is necessary that the several charges made must be in respect of distinct offences and the section will not apply where the several charges are made under Sections 220(3), 220(4), or Section 221.

Types of Cases Where Charges are Formed?

It is generally necessary to be charged in three types of cases:

• Session cases under Section 228 of CrPC
• The warrant case was established by the magistrate based on the police reports under section 240 of the CrPC.
• The warrant case has been established by the magistrate on the basis of the police report, otherwise based on a personal complaint under Section 24 (1) of the CrPC.

In the trial of summons cases and summary trials, the plea has been made instead of the charge.

Conclusion:

It is the duty of the court to enable the accused to know the charges made against him, so that he will be in a position to prepare his defence in that regard. Therefore, charge should be clear and easily understandable to accused and the courts shall be very cautious while framing the charges against accused. Such framing of charge shall not prejudice the accused and it shall not be in such a way of defeating the fundamental principles of natural justice which accused is entitled for.

Click Here for More Articles on CrPC

For More Articles on Different Acts, Click Here