Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 10 of 10 (0.25 seconds)Section 227 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 482 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 226 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Article 136 in Constitution of India [Constitution]
State Of Bihar vs Ramesh Singh on 2 August, 1977
11) From a perusal of the afore-quoted ratio laid down by the
Supreme Court, it is clear that at the time of framing of charge even a
strong suspicion against an accused would justify framing of charge.
The Court at this stage is not required to see whether the accused can
be finally held guilty of the offence but it has to see whether there
exist sufficient grounds for proceeding against the accused. The
Court has to see whether, on the basis of material on record,
ingredients constituting the alleged offences are, prima facie, made
out. For this limited purpose, sifting of evidence is permissible but
probative value of the material brought on record by the prosecution
cannot be gone into at this stage. Though in the instant case the
procedure prescribed for trial of warrant cases has to be followed by
the Special Judge, yet for the purpose of framing of charge in terms of
Section 251-A(3) of J&K Cr. P. C (corresponding to Section 240 of
Central Code) or in terms of Section 269 of the J&K Cr. P. C
MOHAMMAD ALTAF BHAT
2021.09.29 10:14
I attest to the accuracy and
integrity of this document
13 CRMC No.24/2017
(corresponding to Section 228 of Central Code), the considerations are
similar. Thus, ratio laid down in afore-quoted judgment of Supreme
Court is fully applicable to the instant case.
Section 240 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Section 269 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
Amit Kapoor vs Ramesh Chander & Anr on 13 September, 2012
10) The Supreme Court had an occasion to consider both these
questions in the case of Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander and
another, (2012) 9 SCC 460. The Court has, after noticing the
provisions contained in Section 227 and 228 of the Code of Criminal
Procedure, which relate to framing of charge against an accused,
observed as under:
1