Document Fragment View
Fragment Information
Showing contexts for: version changed in State Govt Of Nct Delhi vs Vijay Malik & Ors on 16 May, 2024Matching Fragments
(emphasis supplied)
18. A bare perusal of the order on charge dated dated 24.06.2022 shows that the learned Trial Court had not appreciated the changing versions of the complainant and merely This is a digitally signed order.
The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 14/06/2024 at 20:35:34 brushed aside the contention of the accused persons in this regard. The relevant portion of the order on charge dated 24.06.2022 is reproduced hereunder:
"As regards the contention of the Ld. Counsel for accused regarding the changing versions of the complainant, the same is a matter of trial and need not be looked into at this juncture."
19. It is settled law that an accused person has no right to call upon the learned Trial Court to examine any material placed by him pertaining to his defence, however, Section 227 of the CrPC mandates that the Judge is required to consider the material on record and consider the submissions of the prosecution as well as the accused persons.
20. It is not disputed that the changing versions of the complainant were a part of the chargesheet and the averment of the accused persons in this regard were not duly considered by the learned Trial Court while framing the charge.
21. Moreover, as also noted by the Hon'ble Apex Court in Sajjan Kumar v. CBI (supra), the learned ASJ rightly observed in the impugned order that where two views are possible, the trial Court is empowered to discharge the accused persons and adopt the view that gives rise to mere suspicion instead of grave suspicion and benefits the accused persons.