Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

8. The learned counsel for the petitioners - accused has stated that learned Judge has committed material irregularities in altering the charge and that has resulted into miscarriage of justice and this Court must interfere with it. The learned counsel for the petitioners - accused has relied upon the judgment in the case of L. K. Advani & Ors. v/s. Central Bureau of Investigation, reported in 1997 (4) Crimes 1, Delhi High Court. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court has observed in para-44 at page no.23 are as under:-

Conclusions:-

12. I have considered the facts of the case and I have also gone through the original charge, evidence of Pushpaben, the mother of deceased Nehaben and other evidence on record, the application filed by learned APP for addition of the charge, reasoning of the learned Judge for altering the charge, the statement of deceased also recorded before her death and also the provisions of Sections 216, 217 and 218 of the Code and also the judgment of Delhi High Court in the case of L. K. Advani & Ors. v/s. Central Bureau Of Investigation, and judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Kantilal Chandulal Mehta v/s. State of Maharashtra and ANOTHER,(Supra). In my view, as per the provisions of Section 216 of the Code, the Court has ample power and jurisdiction to alter the charge, the same can be done at any time before judgment is pronounced. In my view, there is no prejudice to the accused because only part of the proceedings have been initiated and other evidence is to be recorded in future. Not only that Section 217 of the Code, the learned Judge will give an opportunity to the accused to recall any witnesses when the charge altered and to cross-examine them in future. In my view, the prosecution has already started about the death in connection with dowry. However, subsequently the charge under Section 304(B) of the Indian Penal Code is added. It may be stated that in this case the incident took place somewhere at 8:30 p.m. regarding the death of Nehaben, the accused No.1 and his family members did not wait for the relatives of the deceased Nehaben and cremated her at late night. After two days, the prosecution has taken out the deadbody and performed the postmortem and then came to know that deceased consumed sulphous drugs and committed suicide. In my view, the learned Judge has power and jurisdiction to alter the charge and he has used his discretionary jurisdiction for altering the charge and he has given cogent and convincing reason for the same. Therefore, I do not see any reason to interfere with the order of the learned Judge in altering charge. I do not find any substance in the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioners I however find considerable substance in the submission of the learned APP particularly Sections 216, 217 and 218 of the Code and the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court. In fact, the judgment of the Delhi High Court relied by the learned counsel for the petitioner to some extent help to the case of prosecution.