(1) A charge is framed only in cases triable by warrant procedure. It pin pointedly draws the attention of the accused against whom it is framed to the accusation levelled against him, the time and space of the alleged occurrence, the provision of law which the offence is said to have been committed.
Every charge should be read out, explained to the accused and he should be asked to plead and his plea should be recorded.
If the charge is defectively framed in as much as certain material details are either inadvertently omitted or wrongly stated, the charge may suitably be amended at any time before the pronouncement of the judgment.
If the Court inadvertently omitted to frame a charge which ought to have been framed, the omission can also be supplied at any time before the pronouncement of the judgment.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
But, whenever a charge is amended or whenever an additional charge is framed, the plea of the accused should be recorded afresh and generally speaking the witnesses if any already examined should be recalled for further examination and cross-examination.
(2) If a person is alleged to have committed more than one offence of the same kind within an interval of 12 months between the date of the commission of the first and the last such offence, the accused may be tried in one and the same case for any number of offences not exceeding three. (Section 219).
But at times in the case of offences such as Criminal Breach of Trust or dishonest misappropriation of money, there may be several individual instances of such breach of trust or misappropriation. In such a case it would be in order if in one charge the aggregate amount in respect of which criminal breach of trust has occurred or which has been misappropriated is mentioned together with the first and the last dates between which the offence alleged took place.
But this is subject to the condition that the time interval between the first and last dates should not exceed 12 months (Section 212(2)).
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(3) If in the course of the same transaction several offences have been committed such as rioting, hurt, murder etc., separate charges may be framed with reference to each of these individual offences.
(4) Alternative charges may be framed where the facts alleged disclose more than one offence or where it is doubtful as to which offence may be said to have been committed on the basis of the facts alleged.
(5) When a charge is framed for a more serious offence ( for example murder punishable under Section 302 IPC) and the facts emerging in the evidence disclose a lesser offence, for example, culpable homicide not amounting to murder punishable under Section 304 part I or Part II IPC, a conviction can be recorded for the lesser of the two offences.
(6) If a charge is framed on the basis of the facts alleged for one offence for example, theft punishable under Section 379 IPC and the Court comes to the conclusion on the same set of facts that a different offence alone can be said to have been made out, for example receiving stolen property punishable under Section 411 IPC, conviction can be recorded for such offence as is deemed to have been made out though no charge has been framed for it.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
(7) Sometimes the Police request that enhanced punishment may be awarded to the accused in view of his previous convictions.
This procedure is adopted generally when a person is charge-sheeted for the offence of theft etc. after he has been previously convicted for the same offence, enhanced punishment in such cases may be awarded under Section 75 of the Indian Penal Code.
It is strictly not imperative that whenever there was a previous conviction there should invariably be enhanced punishment for a subsequent offence. It all depends upon the time interval between the two offences namely the previous one and the latest one, the nature of the property involved and the circumstances under which the offence was committed.
But, the question of enhanced punishment does not at all arise till after the accused is convicted for the offence for which he is being tried. In other words if the charge-sheet is laid for the offence under Section 379 or Section 380 IPC as the case may be, the Court should record the evidence and come to the conclusion that the offence alleged is made out.
ADVERTISEMENTS:
Then the Magistrate should pass an order convicting the accused of the offence in question. Thereafter an additional charge should be framed under Section 75 IPC r/w Section 379 or Section 380 IPC as the case may be, mentioning details of the previous conviction which are referred to in the charge-sheet.
If the accused pleads guilty to the additional charge, the plea should be recorded and enhanced punishment may be awarded. But, if the accused pleads not guilty to the additional charge, the formal evidence regarding the previous conviction should be produced by the prosecution.
What is generally designed in such a case is to examine the Investigating Officer and mark through him the calendar or the judgment relating to the earlier case in which a conviction was recorded against the accused. Thereafter the Court should pronounce the judgment awarding enhanced punishment.