Published on: 09 July 2023 at 11:24 IST
Court: Supreme Court of India
Citation: Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander (2012)
Honourable Supreme Court of India has held that at a Court is only concerned strong suspicion that the accused has committed an offence at the stage of framing of the charges. It is held that Court has to ascertain that the material on record and the facts would be compatible with the innocence of the accused or not. The final test of guilt is not to be applied at that stage of Charge.
17. Framing of a charge is an exercise of jurisdiction by the trial court in terms of Section 228 of the Code, unless the accused is discharged under Section 227 of the Code. Under both these provisions, the court is required to consider the “record of the case” and documents submitted therewith and, after hearing the parties, may either discharge the accused or where it appears to the court and in its opinion there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence, it shall frame the charge.
Once the facts and ingredients of the section exists, then the court would be right in presuming that there is ground to proceed against the accused and frame the charge accordingly. This presumption is not a presumption of law as such.
The satisfaction of the court in relation to the existence of constituents of an offence and the facts leading to that offence is a sine qua non for exercise of such jurisdiction. It may even be weaker than a prima facie case.
There is a fine distinction between the language of Sections 227 and 228 of the Code. Section 227 is the expression of a definite opinion and judgment of the Court while Section 228 is tentative. Thus, to say that at the stage of framing of charge, the Court should form an opinion that the accused is certainly guilty of committing an offence, is an approach which is impermissible in terms of Section 228 of the Code.
Drafted By Abhijit Mishra