In, Renjith Pannackal vs State of Kerala & Anr, a Single Bench of Kerala HC has held that, an order framing charge only after the plea of the accused is taken as per sub-section (2) of Section 240 Cr.P.c. If Section 240 Cr.P.c is interpreted in such a manner that even before taking the plea of the accused there is an order framing charge, it will defeat the very purpose of sub-section (2) of Section 240 Cr.P.c.
Facts
The Revision Petitioner is alleged to have committed various offences punishable under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 and the Indian Penal Code. The Revision Petitioner challenged the final report by filing present appeal before this Court. As per common order this Court directed the Court below as follows: “Accordingly, the criminal miscellaneous cases are closed, without adverting to any contentions on merit, leaving the right open to the petitioner to seek discharge before the court below, if the charges are not framed. If such application is filed before the next posting date as above, the court below may consider it and pass orders thereon in accordance with law.” Thereafter, the Revision Petitioner filed seeking discharge before the Court below.
Contention Made
Petitioner: That the proceedings of the Court below under Section 240 of the Cr.P.c have not culminated in an order framing charge as the plea of the Revision Petitioner has not been taken.
That, that the act of framing of charge by the Court is completed only after the plea of the accused is taken.
Respondent: That as the first part of Section 240 Cr.P.c is over, the process of framing of charge has become final and what is left is recording of the plea of the accused, a formality in which the accused is asked whether he pleads guilty of the offence charged or not.
Further, That the word 'then' in sub-section (2) of Section 240 Cr.P.c makes it clear that the process of framing of charge is confined to sub-section (1) of Section 240 Cr.P.c.
Court Observation
The Single Bench of Kerala HC while deciding the question of, would the proceedings as provided in Section 240 of the Code of Criminal Procedure culminate in an order framing charge before the plea of the accused is taken? , Observed that;
A meaningful interpretation of Section 240 of the Cr.P.c is that the proceedings culminate in an order framing charge only after the plea of the accused is taken as per sub-section (2) of Section 240 Cr.P.c. If Section 240 Cr.P.c is interpreted in such a manner that even before taking the plea of the accused there is an order framing charge, it will defeat the very purpose of sub-section (2) of Section 240 Cr.P.c.
Court Judgment
The Kerala HC while disposing the present criminal revision petition has held that, The materials placed before the Court lead to the conclusion that as far as the petitioner is concerned, no meaningful hearing as provided in Sections 239 and 240 of the Cr.P.c was conducted by the Court below.
Further, Court had given the Revision Petitioner an opportunity to seek discharge before the Court below if charges were not framed and Court has held that the proceedings in the Court below have not culminated in an order framing charge.
Case: Renjith Pannackal vs State of Kerala & Anr.
Citation: CRL.REV.PET NO.161 OF 2022
Bench: Mr Justice K. Babu
Decided on: 1st August, 2022
Read Judgment @Latestlaws.com
Picture Source :
