DEEPESH KATARIYA BCOM LL.B.

(HONS) VII SEM

CRPC ASSIGNMENT 17/10/2020

Effects of omission to frame, or absence of, or error in charge

Error in Charge

In order to understand the provisions in case of an error in charge Section 215 and 216 must
be read with Section 464 of the Code.

Effect of Error

According to Section 215 of the Code, any error in stating the offence or any error in stating
the particulars required to be mentioned in the charge shall not be material at any stage of the
case. In addition, any omission to state such offence or the particulars of the charge shall be
immaterial. However, if such error or such omission has misled the accused or if it has
occasioned the failure of justice, then such error or omission shall be considered material.

When Court Can Alter or Amend a Charge

Section 216 states the conditions under which the Court can alter or amend or add to any
charge:

 Before the judgement is pronounced, the Court can alter or amend any charge;
 Such alteration or addition has to be read and explained to the accused;
 If in the opinion of the Court, the addition or alteration to the charge does not
prejudice the accused in his defence or the prosecutor in the conduct of his case,
then the Court may alter or amend the charge and proceed with the trial according
to its discretion;
 But if the Court is of the opinion that the alteration or addition to the charge is
likely to prejudice the accused or the prosecutor as aforesaid, then following the
alteration or amendment, the Court may, at its discretion either direct a new trial or
adjourn the trial for such period as it may consider necessary;
 If the previous sanction is necessary to be obtained for the prosecution of the
offence stated in the altered or added charge, then the Court shall not proceed with
the case until such sanction is obtained. 
 DEEPESH KATARIYA BCOM LL.B.(HONS) VII SEM
CRPC ASSIGNMENT 17/10/2020

Effect of Omission to Frame, or Absence of, or Error in Charge

Section 464 of the Code states the following:

(1) Any finding, sentence or order by a Court of competent jurisdiction shall not be deemed
invalid merely on the ground that:

 No charge was framed;

 Any error, omission or irregularity in the charge, including misjoinder of charge.

Such finding, sentence or order of the Court shall be deemed invalid only when it is in the
opinion of the Court of appeal, confirmation or revision, there has been a failure of justice.

(2) When the Court of appeal, confirmation or revision is of the opinion that a failure of
justice has in fact been occasioned, then – 

1. In case there is an omission in the framing of the charge, the said Court may order
that the charge may be framed and that the trial may be commenced again from the
point immediately after the framing of the charge;
2. In the case of an error, omission or irregularity in the charge, direct that a new trial
to be commenced upon a charge framed in whatever manner that the Court may
think fit.

Provided that if the Court is of the opinion that the facts of the case are of such a nature that
no valid charge could be preferred against the accused in respect of the facts of the case
proved, the said Court shall quash the conviction of the accused.

Reference may be made in this regard to the case of Tulsi Ram and Ors. vs. State of Uttar
Pradesh. In this case, the Court considered these aspects and laid down that the appellants
completely understood the charges against them and they never raised a complaint at an
appropriate stage of the trial that they were confused or bewildered by the charge against
them. Therefore, the Court refused to accept any grievances raised by the accused regarding
the framing of charges against them.
 DEEPESH KATARIYA BCOM LL.B.(HONS) VII SEM
CRPC ASSIGNMENT 17/10/2020

Recalling of Witness When Charge is Altered

According to Section 217 of the Code, whenever the charge has been altered after the
commencement of the trial, the accused and the prosecutor shall be allowed:

1. To recall or re-summon a witness who has already been examined and examine
him in reference to such alteration or addition;
2. However, if the Court is of the opinion that the prosecutor or the accused is
recalling or re-examining the witness with the view of vexing or delaying or
defeating the ends of justice, then the Court may, by providing reasons in writing
refuse to allow to re-examine such witness;
3. To call any further witness that the Court may deem material for the case.

Under Section 215 & 464 of CrPC object is to prevent failure of justice where there has been
only technical breach of rules not going to the root of the case as such. The two sections read
together lay down that whatever the irregularity in framing of a charge, it is not fatal unless
there is prejudiced caused to the accused12. The object of the section is to prevent failure of
justice where there is some breach of the rules in the formulation of the charge. However, the
section also makes it clear that insignificant irregularities in stating the particulars of the
offence will not affect the trial or its outcome. In order to decide whether the error or
omission has resulted in a failure of justice the court should have the regards to the manner in
which the accused conducted his defence & to the nature of the objection.

The object of the charge is to give an accused notice of the matter he is charged with. If the
necessary information is conveyed to him and no prejudice is caused to him because of the
charges, the accused cannot succeed by merely showing that the charges framed were
defective. Nor could a conviction recorded on charged under wrong provisions be reversed if
the accused was informed of the details of the offences committed and thus no prejudice was
caused to him1 The mere omission to frame a charge or a mere defect in the charge is no
ground for setting aside a conviction. Procedural laws are designed to subserve the ends of
justice & not to frustrate them by mere technicalities.

216.Court may alter charge.-

(1) Any Court may alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced.

(2) Every such alteration or addition shall be read and explained to the accused.

1
 SS Rout v. State of Orissa, 1991 Cri LJ 1595
 DEEPESH KATARIYA BCOM LL.B.(HONS) VII SEM
CRPC ASSIGNMENT 17/10/2020

(3) If the alteration or addition to a charge is such that proceeding immediately with the trial
is not likely, in the opinion of the Court, to prejudice the accused in his defense or the
prosecutor in the conduct of the case, the Court may, in its discretion, after such alteration or
addition has been made, proceed with the trial as if the altered or added charge had been the
original charge.

(4) If the alteration or addition is such that proceeding immediately with the trial is likely, in
the opinion of the Court, to prejudice the accused or the prosecutor as aforesaid, the Court
may either direct a new trial or adjourn the trial for such period as may be necessary.

(5) If the offence stated in the altered or added charge is one for the prosecution of which
previous sanction is necessary, the case shall not be proceeded with until such sanction is
obtained, unless sanction has been already obtained for a prosecution on the same facts as
those on which the altered or added charge is founded.