Effect of omission to frame, or absence of, or error in, charge
AI Assist
Summary
No finding, sentence or order is not automatically void merely because no charge was framed or because the charge contained an error, omission or misjoinder. On appeal, confirmation or revision the court will interfere only if it is satisfied a failure of justice actually occurred. If so the court can order a charge to be framed and the trial restarted from after framing, or direct a new trial; if no valid charge can be based on the proved facts it will quash the conviction.
Example
Ravi was convicted after trial though the trial court never formally framed a charge against him. On appeal the appellate court found that omission caused a failure of justice. The court ordered a charge to be framed and the trial restarted from the point immediately after framing.
Bare Act
Enacted text(1) No finding, sentence or order by a Court of competent jurisdiction shall be deemed invalid merely on the ground that no charge was framed or on the ground of any error, omission or irregularity in the charge including any misjoinder of charges, unless, in the opinion of the Court of appeal, confirmation or revision, a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned thereby.
(2) If the Court of appeal, confirmation or revision, is of opinion that a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned, it may,-
-
(a) in the case of an omission to frame a charge, order that a charge be framed, and that the trial be recommenced from the point immediately after the framing of the charge;
-
(b) in the case of an error, omission or irregularity in the charge, direct a new trial to be had upon a charge framed in whatever manner it thinks fit:
Provided that if the Court is of opinion that the facts of the case are such that no valid charge could be preferred against the accused in respect of the facts proved, it shall quash the conviction.
Previous year papers
Pick your exam. we'll email the most recent paper.