discharge1

Right to get discharged from the allegation is the valuable right of an accused facing the criminal trail if certain conditioned is fulfilled.

The Provision of discharge is crafted in CrPc.,1973 and BNSS-2023.

Get Discharged from the allegation is a valuable right of an accused.

The Supreme Court has held that orders framing charges or refusing discharge are neither interlocutory nor final in nature and are therefore not affected by the bar of Section 397 (2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

Trial court and magistrate the first line to protect the FRs and discharge the accused

Courts Cannot Be Silent Spectators Or Loudspeakers To Echo Whatever Is Written In Chargesheet: Delhi High Court.

The Delhi High Court has recently observed that Courts cannot be silent spectators or loudspeakers to echo whatever has been presented before them in the chargesheet.

Justice Neena Bansal Krishna made the observation while discharging two brothers for the offence of attempt to murder. One of the brothers was also discharged of the offence of Section 27 of the Arms Act. The incident happened in 2017.

The court allowed the brothers’ plea challenging a trial court order framing charges against them. While doing so, the court said that the investigations were carried out by three I.Os, who all met with no success in identifying the assailants who allegedly shot the complainant and other individuals who got injured.

The court further noted that once the alleged assailants were known to the complainants, there was no explanation as to why they did not name them in the first complaint itself which was made two years prior to the second complaint.

The inordinate delay in making the complaints despite the assailants being known to the complainant and the injured for past 14 years, is a circumstance which clearly points out to the false implication of the petitioners. There is no explanation whatsoever for such belated naming of the two petitioners except that they have been falsely named with a malafide intention subsequently,” the court said.

It added that the I.O chose not to conduct the investigations to retrieve the bullet shells from the spot which could have benefitted the investigations in some way.

Justice Krishna observed that it was a fit case where even a prima facie case was not made out against the petitioner brothers on the basis of the evidence collected by the I.O.

“In such cases, where the false implication is is writ large, no fruitful purpose would be served in making the petitioners go through the entire trial which in fact, would be a travesty of justice. The Courts cannot be the silent spectators or a loudspeaker to echo whatever has been presented before it in the Chargesheet,” the court said while allowing the plea.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *