Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Jainab Sayyed Akhtar Ali, the original informant, filed a criminal writ petition before the Bombay High Court at Aurangabad challenging the order dated 18-08-2018 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Criminal Writ Revision No.116 of 2018, and the order below Exhibit 47 in Summary Trial Case No.527 of 2011 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ahmednagar. The impugned orders rejected the informant's application for framing additional charge against the accused persons. The factual background is that the informant lodged an FIR on 01-03-2011, leading to Crime No.72 of 2011 for offences under Sections 342, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 of the Indian Penal Code. After investigation, a charge-sheet was filed, and charge was framed at Exhibit 13 for those offences. On 04-12-2017, the informant filed an application under Section 211 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) for addition of charge. The trial court rejected the application, and the revisional court upheld that rejection. The legal issue was whether the informant could seek addition of charge after the charge had already been framed in a summary trial. The court analyzed the provisions of Section 262 CrPC, which governs the procedure for summary trials, and noted that in summary trials, the procedure for framing charge is different from warrant trials. The court held that once charge is framed in a summary trial, no further charge can be added under Section 211 CrPC. The court found no illegality or perversity in the impugned orders and dismissed the petition.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Summary Trial - Addition of Charge - Section 211, 262, 323 CrPC - The informant sought addition of charge under Section 211 CrPC after charge was already framed in a summary trial - The court held that in summary trials, the procedure under Section 262 CrPC applies, and once charge is framed, no further charge can be added - The petition was dismissed as the trial court and revisional court correctly rejected the application (Paras 1-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the informant can seek addition of charge after the charge has already been framed in a summary trial case.
Final Decision
The petition is dismissed. The impugned orders are confirmed.
Law Points
- Summary trial procedure
- Addition of charge after framing
- Section 211 CrPC
- Section 262 CrPC
- Section 323 CrPC
Case Details
2019 LawText (BOM) (12) 7
Criminal Writ Petition No.1652 of 2018
Mr. A. M. Gaikwad (for petitioner), Mr. A. R. Kale (APP for respondent no.1), Mr. Shaikh Mazhar A. Jahagirdar (for respondent no.3)
The State of Maharashtra, Shaikh Azir Ahmed Abdul Razzak @ Najju Pahelwan, Shaikh Kasam Hasan
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal writ petition challenging rejection of application for addition of charge in a summary trial case.
Remedy Sought
Setting aside the order dated 18-08-2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar in Criminal Writ Revision No.116 of 2018 and the order below Exhibit 47 in Summary Trial Case No.527 of 2011 passed by the Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ahmednagar, and allowing the application for addition of charge.
Filing Reason
The informant's application for framing additional charge against the accused persons was rejected by the trial court and upheld by the revisional court.
Previous Decisions
The trial court rejected the application for addition of charge; the revisional court upheld that rejection.
Issues
Whether the informant can seek addition of charge after the charge has already been framed in a summary trial case.
Submissions/Arguments
The informant argued that there was material to add additional charge under Section 211 CrPC.
The respondents opposed the application, and the courts below rejected it.
Ratio Decidendi
In summary trials, the procedure under Section 262 CrPC applies, and once charge is framed, no further charge can be added under Section 211 CrPC.
Judgment Excerpts
Present petition has been filed by the original informant for setting aside the impugned order dated 18-08-2018 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Ahmednagar, in Criminal Writ Revision No.116 of 2018, and also order passed below Exhibit 47 in Summary Trial Case No.527 of 2011 by learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Ahmednagar, whereby the application filed by the informant for framing additional charge against the accused persons came to be rejected.
Procedural History
FIR lodged on 01-03-2011, Crime No.72 of 2011 registered under Sections 342, 323, 504, 506 read with 34 IPC. Charge-sheet filed, charge framed at Exhibit 13. On 04-12-2017, informant filed application under Section 211 CrPC for addition of charge. Trial court rejected application. Revision filed, dismissed on 18-08-2018. Present writ petition filed.
Acts & Sections
- Indian Penal Code, 1860: 342, 323, 504, 506, 34
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: 211, 262, 323
