7 marks

1.maintenance of wife, children, and parents. Section 125 Cr.PC

Under Section 125 following persons can claim maintenance :

1. Wife

i. Any persons wife who is unable to maintain herself can claim maintenance from such person
even if she is a minor.
ii. Only a legally married wife can get maintenance and second wife or mistress cannot get
maintenance. A woman is not entitled to maintenance merely because she had stayed together
with a person.
iii. A wife who has been divorced and has not remarried is entitled to maintenance.

2. Children

i. Legitimate or illegitimate minor child, whether married or not, unable to maintain itself can
claim maintenance under Section 125. A minor is a person who has not attained the age of
majority under the Indian Majority Act.
ii. The liability of a father will continue to maintain his married minor daughter till she attains
the age of majority, if her husband is a minor too.
iv. A child is not entitled to claim maintenance after attaining majority unless it is unable to
maintain itself by reason of any physical or mental disability. If the child is a married daughter,
it is her husbands responsibilty to maintain her.
v. Right of the child to claim maintenance from the father is independent from the right of the
mother. Therefore, a child is entitled to claim maintenance even if the mother is not entitled.

3. Parents

i. A person has to maintain his father or mother, unable to maintain himself or herself.
ii. Such parents include step-father and step-mother or adoptive mother.
iii. A married daughter may also be held responsible for maintaining her parents. Married
daughter can also be liable to maintain her parents.

V. Against whom maintenance can be claimed?

As per the SC decision in Vijaya Manohar Arbat v. Kashirao Rajaram, maintenance can be
claimed against father, husband, son, and married daughter.

VI. Conditions
i. For being entitled for maintenance under section 125, the applicant must be unable to
maintain himself/herself.
ii. The respondent against whom maintenance is claimed must have sufficient means to
maintain the applicant.
iii. A wife claiming maintenance :
a. must not be living in adultery
b. must not have refused to live with her husband without sufficient reasons.
c. must not be living separately by mutual consent.

VIII. Procedure : S.126

1. Proceedings may be initiated against a person in any district based on :

i. his residence
ii. his or his wifes residence
iii. where he last resided with mother of illegitimate child

2. Evidence has to be recorded by the Magistrate in the presence of bot the parties or in the
presence of their pleaders.

3. According to proviso of section 126,if a person is willingly avoiding service or willingly

neglecting to attend the court then the Magistrate can pass an ex-parte order.

4. Such an exparte order can be challenged within 3 months by showing good cause for not
appearing.

IX. Amount of Maintenance

1. Prior to the Amendment Act of 2001, amount of maintenance was fixed at Rs. 500 but such
limit was subsequently removed.

2. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case the Magistrate may grant any amount of
Maintenance.

3. The amount of maintenance may be calculated from wither the date of the order or from the
date of maintenance.

4. The Magistrate may pass an order for granting interim maintenance.

X. Alteration and Cancellation S.127

i. Maintenance once granted may be altered or canceled according to the facts and
circumstances of the each case.
ii. Maintenance may be altered or canceled on the following grounds:
a. wife is living a adulterous life.
b. wife refuses to live with husband without sufficient cause
c. mutual consent
d. divorce
e. remarriage, etc.

XI. Enforcement S.128

Order of maintenance, against whom it is granted, may be supplied with a copy thereof free of
cost. Such an order may be enforced by a Magistrate anywhere in India where the person against
whom such an order is made resides.

XII. Mode of enforcement

1. Warrant for levying amount :

A Magistrate may issue warrant for levying such dues of maintenance as if it were a fine and can
sentence such a person to imprisonment which may be upto one month. Property of a person may
be attached by a Magistrate in case of non payment.

2. Limitation

An application to issue warrant must be made within one year from the date on which
maintenance became due.

2. What is a confession?

Confession is the admission of guilt, stating or suggesting an inference as to guilt by an accused

made in custody. According to Justice Stephen, a “confession”, is an admission made at any time
by a person charged with a crime stating or suggesting the inference that he committed that crime.

Statements recorded by Magistrate under CrPC

Legal provisions

Section 164 CrPC talks about the statements recorded by Magistrate:

Sub Section (1) authorizes the Magistrate to record the statement of a person or his confession, no
matter whether he posses jurisdiction in the case. If he does not possess such jurisdiction sub s (6)
will apply. The word statement is not limited to statement by a witness but includes accused and
not amounting to a confession.

Sub Section (1) states that: any Metropolitan Magistrate or Judicial Magistrate may,whether or not
he has jurisdiction in the case, record any confession or statement made to him in the course of an
investigation under this chapter or under any other law for the time being in force,or at any time
afterwards before the commencement of the inquiry or trial.

Warning under Subsection 2

Subsection 2 of Section 164 mentions a warning. Under the statutory provision, the Magistrate is
first required to explain to the accused that he was not bound to make a confession and that it did
so, it might be used against him. This is the sine qua non for recording confession. The other
mandatory requirement is that the Magistrate must put questions to the accused to satisfy himself
that the confession was a voluntary so as to enable him to give the requisite certificate under
subsection(4). The Magistrate cautioned the accused that he was not bound to make a confession,
but did not put questions to the accused to satisfy himself that the accused was making confession
voluntary.

In Mahabir Singh v. State of Haryana court observed that, Where the Magistrate fails to explain to
accused that he was not bound to make the confession and that if he did so, such confession might
be used as evidence against him, that confession so recorded, cannot be taken into consideration.

The Magistrate must satisfy himself that no pressure or force was used on the accused who makes
the confession. Any mark of the person of the accused to vitiate the voluntary character of the
confession. When was held not only inadmissible under the section but it could not be used under
the other provision of Indian Evidence Act such as sections 21 & 29.

Manner of recording Confession, signatures etc.

Subsection (4) says that the confession should be recorded in a manner provided under section 281
and shall be signed by the person making it. The Magistrate shall then make the memorandum at
the foot of such confession. The Magistrate cannot merely sign a printed instruction supplied to
him. This will be violative of this section. The confession which was made voluntary and recorded
correctly in a different language can be said to have amounted to an irregularity. The entire
confession must be brought on record. The confession must be shown to be voluntary before it can
be acted upon.

It is necessary that the confession should be signed by the accused. If it is not, will be admissible
in evidence, the commission would no vitality the confession and the irregularity is curable under
section 463. The attestation of the accused is unnecessary when a confession is made in court to
the officer trying the case at the time of trial.

The confession without memorandum that it is voluntary is bad in law and cannot be admitted in
evidence.

Manner of recording statement other than confession

Subsection (5) lays down the manner in which a statement is to be recorded. The statement of the
witness can be recorded under this section even after the submission of charge sheet in the case.
See this also
Recording the Statement of Rape Victim

Subsection 5A reads as a mandatory provision for recording the statement of the prosecutrix under
Section 164(5A) of CrPC by the Magistrate. As soon as the crime is brought to the knowledge of
the police officer, he is duty bound to take the victim to the nearest Judicial Magistrate for
recording her statement. The victim approaches the court for recording her statement being
distressed and aggrieved with the attitude of the investigating agency. Thus it is the duty of the
Magistrate to record her statement.

Principles

In RABINDRA KUMAR PAL alias DARA SINGH v. REPUBLIC OF INDIA, Supreme Court
of India laid down the following principles:

1. The provisions of Section 164 Cr.P.C. must be complied with not only in form but in
essence.
2. Before proceeding to record the confessional statement, a searching enquiry must be
made from the accused as to the custody from which he was produced and the treatment
he had been receiving in such custody in order to ensure that there is no scope for doubt
of any sort of extraneous influence proceeding from a source interested in the
prosecution.
3. A Magistrate should ask the accused as to why he wants to make a statement which surely
shall go against his interest in the trial.
4. The maker should be granted sufficient time for reflection.
5. He should be assured of protection from any sort of apprehended torture or pressure
from the police in case he declines to make a confessional statement.
6. A judicial confession not given voluntarily is unreliable, more so, when such a confession
is retracted, the conviction cannot be based on such retracted judicial confession.
7. Non-compliance with Section 164 Cr.P.C. goes to the root of the Magistrate’s jurisdiction
to record the confession and renders the confession unworthy of credence.
8. During the time of reflection, the accused should be completely out of police influence.
The judicial officer, who is entrusted with the duty of recording confession, must apply
his judicial mind to ascertain and satisfy his conscience that the statement of the accused
is not on account of any extraneous influence on him.
9. At the time of recording the statement of the accused, no police or police officer shall be
present in the open court.
10. Confession of a co-accused is a weak type of evidence.
11. Usually, the Court requires some corroboration from the confessional statement before
convicting the accused person on such a statement

Who is qualified person for recording the statement under section 164 of the code

According to section 164(1) of CrPC, Judicial Magistrate or the Metropolitan Magistrate, whether
or not having jurisdiction in the matter can record the confession or statement made to him in the
course of the investigation.
What is the procedure to be followed while recording statements?

The procedure to be followed while recording the statement is mentioned in Subsection 5 of section
164. This subsection states that any Statement ( excluding confession) made under subsection shall
be recorded in a manner hereinafter provided for the recording of evidence as is, in the opinion of
the magistrate, best fitted to the circumstances of the case. The magistrate shall also have the power
to administer oath to the person whose statement is so recorded.

Delhi High Court while citing Punjab Government circular Letter No. 6091-J.-36/39329 (H.—
Judl.), dated the 19th December 1936, to all District Magistrates in the Punjab, in Delhi High Court
Rules said that, before the Magistrate proceeds to record the confession, he should arrange so far
as is compatible with his safety and that of his staff and with the safe custody of the prisoner—that
the latter is left for some time (say, for half an hour) out of the hearing of police officers or other
persons likely to influence him, in order to ensure that the statements made are voluntary.

Hence there is no as such procedure prescribed and it is left to the magistrate deal the matter with
the best-suited way, keeping in mind the circumstances of cases.

3.

Jurisdiction of the Criminal Courts

 Section 177 – According to this section, the Court under whose jurisdiction the offence
has been committed only has the authority to inquire into and try such case.
 Section 178 deals with the situations where the offence has been committed in more than
one place,
 When the place of commission of the offence is uncertain because it has been committed
in several places.
 Where an offence is partly committed in one local area and the rest in another area.
 When the offence comprises of several acts, committed in different local areas.

If any of the above conditions are fulfilled, then such offence may be inquired into or tried by a
Court having jurisdiction over any of such local area.

 Section 179, emphasises that fact that when an act is an offence because of anything
which has been done and as a consequence which has ensued, the said offence may be
inquired into or tried by a court of competent jurisdiction.
 Section 180 deals with the place of trial when the act committed is an offence because it
is related to some other offence. According to it the offence which has been committed
first has to be inquired into or tried, when two acts are done in connection with each
other and both are offences, by the court under whose jurisdiction either of the act has
been committed. In all such provisions, the emphasis is always on the place where the
offence has been committed, to find the jurisdiction.
 But, section 181 specifies conditions in case of certain offences. According to section
181(1), the trial can also be commenced where the accused is found, besides the place
 where the offence was committed. Section 181(1) talks about the offences, when not
committed in a single place. It deals with the following cases.
 Thug, or murder committed while performing the act of thug, dacoity, or dacoity with
murder etc- where the offence is committed or where the accused is found.
 Kidnapping or abduction of a person- the place from where the person was kidnapped/
abducted or where the person was concealed or conveyed or detained.
 Theft, extortion or robbery – the Court where the offence has been committed or where
the stolen property is possessed, received or delivered, has the jurisdiction to try such a
case.
 Criminal misappropriation or criminal breach of trust- where the offence has been
committed or where any part of the property which is the subject matter of the offence
has been received or retained, required to be returned or accounted for, by the accused.

But the above section deals with offences when the offender is travelling, as evident from the
nature of the offences as specified under this section.

 Section 182 deals with offences committed by letters etc. Under this section, if any
offence includes cheating, if the victim has been deceived by means of letters or
telecommunication messages, it shall be looked into by the Court under whose local
jurisdiction such letters or messages have been sent or received; and under the local
jurisdiction of the Court in which the property has been delivered by the person deceived
or has been received by the accused person.
 Section 183 deals with offences which have been committed during journey or voyage.
When a person commits an offence, during journey or against a person who is travelling,
or the thing in respect of which, the offence has been committed is in due course of its
journey or voyage, the offence has to be inquired into or tired by a Court through or into
whose local jurisdiction that person or thing has passed, during the journey.
 The place of trial for offences which are triable together consists of two circumstances.
 When any person commits offences, such that he may be charged with, tried at one trial
for, each such offence according to the provisions of section 219, section 220 or section
221.
 When the offences or offences have been committed by several persons, in a manner that
the Court may charge and try them together, according to the provisions of section 223.

In either of the circumstances, the Court which is competent to inquire and try such do the same.

 Section 185 deals with the power of the State Government, according to which the
government can direct that any cases or class of cases which have been committed for
trial in any district, may be tried in a sessions court. It has to ensure that such direction is
not inconsistent with any of the directions which have been already issued by any other
Superior Court, as per the Constitution, or as mentioned under the Code of Criminal
Procedure or under any other law for the time being in force.
 Section 186 addresses the situation wherein the cognizance of a particular offence has
been taken by two or more courts and confusion arises as to which of the Courts shall
 inquire into or try that offence, in such a case, only the High Courts have the authority to
resolve the confusion. The criteria for resolving such issues are as follows.
 If the same High Court supervises the courts involved, then by that High Court
 If the same High Court does not supervise the courts involved then, by the High Court
which first commenced the proceedings as an appellate criminal court. Thereafter, all the
other proceedings in respect of that offence shall be discontinued.
 Section 187 states the power of a Magistrate to issue summons or warrant for offences
which have been committed beyond his local jurisdiction. In such a situation the
Magistrate has the authority to order such a person to be produced before him and then
send him to the Magistrate of competent jurisdiction.
 The conditions related to the offences when committed outside the territory of India have
been dealt with under section 188. According to this section, when an offence is
committed outside India-
 by a citizen of India, whether on the high seas or elsewhere
 by a person, not being such citizen, on any ship or aircraft registered in India.

Such a person may be treated in respect of such offence as if it had been committed at any place
within India and at such a place, where he may be found.

The proviso to this section specifies that no such offence shall be inquired into or tried in India
without the previous sanction from the Central Government. The most important factor in the
above-mentioned provision is the place where the offence has been committed.

Section 188 specifically deals with the case when the offence is committed outside India. These
offences have to be deemed to have been committed in India, if committed by an Indian citizen, in
high seas or in any other place. Also, when the offence is committed by a person who although is
not an Indian citizen but is travelling in any Indian aircraft or ship.

 When the provisions of Section 188 are applicable, then the Central Government may, if
it deems fit, direct that the copies of depositions or exhibits given to a judicial officer or
before a diplomatic or consular representative of India in or for that territory shall be
received as evidence by the Court holding such inquiry or trial in any case in which such
Court might issue a commission for taking evidence as to the matters to which such
depositions or exhibits relate.
 Section 188 and Section 189 should be read together. They proceed on the basis that a
fugitive is in India and can be found anywhere in India. The Court has to find the accused
and the finding of the accused has to be done where the accused appears. It is clear from
the above section that the accused cannot be found by a mere complaint or by the Police.
 Further, it is next to impossible for the victim of an offence committed outside India, to
visit India and try to ascertain the location of the accused and then approach the court.
The balance of convenience is higher on the side of such a victim. Therefore, all such
points have been considered while drafting Section 188 and Section 189 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure. The said victim has been vested with the right to approach any Court
 in India according to his convenience and file a case in respect of the offence committed
upon him by an Indian abroad.

In the case of Reg vs. Benito Lopez(1), the issue related to the jurisdiction of English Courts for
the offences committed on the high seas by foreigners who are travelling in England borne ships
was questioned. It was held that the country which tried the accused did not go beyond its
jurisdiction. The decision highlighted the important principle of International Law that a person is
liable to be punished of all such offences, which he has committed irrespective of the place where
it is committed.

4.APP

S. 25 Assistant Public Prosecutors

Description
1. The State Government shall appoint in every district one or more Assistant public
Prosecutors for conducting prosecutions in the Courts of Magistrates.
1A. The Central Government may appoint one or more Assistant Public Prosecutors for
the purpose of conducting any case or class of cases in the Courts of Magistrates.
2. Save as otherwise provided in Sub-Section (3), no police officer shall be eligible to be
appointed as an Assistant Public Prosecutor.
3. Where no Assistant Public Prosecutor is available for the purposes of any particular
case, the District Magistrate may appoint any other person to be the Assistant Public
Prosecutor in charge of that case;
Provided that a police officer shall not be so appointed—
1. if he has taken any part in the investigation into the offence with respect to which
the accused is being prosecuted; or
2. if he is below the rank of Inspector.

S. 25 A Directorate of Prosecution

Description
1. The State Government may establish a Directorate of Prosecution consisting of a
Director of Prosecution and as many Deputy Directors of Prosecution as it thinks fit.
2. A person shall be eligible to be appointed as a Director of Prosecution or a Deputy
Director of Prosecution, only if he has been in practice as an advocate for not less than
ten years and such appointment shall be made with the concurrence of the Chief Justice
of the High Court.
 3. The Head of the Directorate of Prosecution shall be the Director of Prosecution, who
shall function under the administrative control of the Head of the Home Department in
the State.
4. Every Deputy Director of Prosecution shall be subordinate to the Director of
Prosecution.
5. Every Public Prosecutor, Additional Public Prosecutor and Special Public Prosecutor
appointed by the State Government under Sub-Section (1), or as the case may be, Sub-
Section (8), of section 24 to conduct cases in the High Court shall be subordinate to the
Director of Prosecution.
6. Every Public Prosecutor, Additional Public Prosecutor and Special Public Prosecutor
appointed by the State Government under Sub-Section (3), or as the case may be, Sub-
Section (8), of section 24 to conduct cases in District Courts and every Assistant Public
Prosecutor appointed under Sub-Section (1) of section 25 shall be subordinate to the
Deputy Director of Prosecution.
7. The powers and functions of the Director of Prosecution and the Deputy Directors of
Prosecution and the areas for which each of the Deputy Directors of Prosecution have
been appointed shall be such as the State Government may, by notification, specify.
8. The provisions of this section shall not apply to the Advocate General for the State while
performing the functions of a Public Prosecutor.

5. Case diary

Under the provision of Section 172 Cr.P.C., every Police Officer conducting the
investigation shall maintain a record of investigation done on each day in a Case Diary in the
prescribed Form. Case Diaries are important to record the investigation carried out by
an Investigating Officer. Any Court may send for the Case Diaries of a case under inquiry or
trial in such Court and may use such diaries, not as evidence in the case, but to aid it in such inquiry
or trial.

Facts to be incorporated in Case Diaries:

The Case Diary, which is a record of day by day investigation of a case, shall
contain
details of the time at which the information reached the Investigating Officer, tim
e at which the
investigation began and was closed, the place or places visited by him and a stat
ement of the facts and circumstances ascertained through investigation.

Case Diaries should contain only particulars of actual steps taken or progress made in the
investigation and such details of investigation which have bearing on the case. Addresses, both
present and permanent of the witnesses and all other relevant details should be invariably recorded
in the Case Diaries. The following shall not be incorporated in the Case Diaries:

 The opinion of Investigating Officer, the opinion of the Supervisory Officers and Law
Officers.
  Any conflict of opinion between I.O., Law Officers, SP, DIG, and Head Office.
 Recommendations made in concluding report of the O., comments of Law Officer(s) and
Supervisory Officers.
 Any other facts/circumstances not relating to the investigation of the case.

Every Investigating Officer, to whom the part investigation of a case is entrusted, will also
maintain a Case Diary for the investigation made by him. This may be called ‘Supplementary Case
Diary’ (SCD). SCDs will be taken on record by the Chief I.O., who may incorporate the gist
of important facts disclosed in such investigation
in his own CD for the date when the SCD is received by him. It is important that
SCD must be submitted without any delay. A copy of the CD submitted by I.O./Chief I.O.
to the Superintendent of Police would invariably enclose the SCDs received by him.[i]

CONCEPT OF CASE DIARY

Section 172 Cr.P.C. lays down that every police officer making an investigation should maintain
a diary of his investigation. Each State has its own police regulations or otherwise known as police
standing orders and some of them provide as to the manner in which such diaries are to be
maintained. These diaries are called case diaries or special diaries. Like in Uttar Pradesh, the diary
under Section 172 is known as ‘special diary’ or ‘case diary’ and in some other States like Andhra
Pradesh and Tamilnadu, it is known as ‘case diary’.

The Section itself indicates as to the nature of the entries that have to be made and what is intended
to be recorded is what the police officer did, the places where he went and the places which he
visited etc. and in general it should contain a statement of the circumstances ascertained through
his investigation. Sub-section (2) is to the effect that a criminal court may send for the diaries and
may use them not as evidence but only to aid in such inquiry or trial. The aid which the court can
receive from the entries in such a diary usually is confined to utilizing the information given therein
as the foundation for questions to be put to the witnesses particularly the police witnesses and the
court may, if necessary, in its discretion use the entries to contradict the police officer who made
them.

Coming to their use by the accused, Sub-section (3) clearly lays down that neither the accused nor
his agents shall be entitled to call for such diaries nor he or they may be entitled to see them merely
because they are referred to by the courts. But in case the police officer uses the entries to refresh
his memory or if the court uses them for the purpose of contradicting such police officer then
provisions of Section 161 or Section 145, as the case may be, of the Evidence Act would apply.

Section 145 of the Evidence Act provides for cross-examination of a witness as to the previous
statements made by him in writing or reduced into writing and if it is intended to contradict him
by the writing, his attention must be called to those parts of it which are to be used for the purpose
of contradiction.

Section 161 deals with the adverse party’s rights as to the production, inspection, and cross-
examination when a document is used to refresh the memory of the witness. It can, therefore, be
seen that the right of accused to cross-examine the police officer with reference to the entries in
the General Diary is very much limited in extent and even that limited scope arises only when the
court uses the entries to contradict the police officer or when the police officer uses it for refreshing
his memory and that again, is subject to the limitations of Sections 145 and 161 of the Evidence
Act and for that limited purpose only the accused in the discretion of the court may be permitted
to peruse the particular entry and in case if the court does not use such entries for the purpose of
contradicting the police officer or if the police officer does not use the same for refreshing his
memory, then the question of accused getting any right to use the entries even to that limited extent
does not arise.[ii]

Section 172 deals with three clauses:

(1). Every police officer making an investigation under this chapter shall day by day enter his
proceedings in the investigation in a diary, setting forth the time his investigation, the place or
places visited by him, and a statement of the circumstances ascertained through his investigation.

(2). Any criminal court may send for the police diaries of a case under inquiry or trial in such court,
and may use such court, and may use such diaries, not as evidence in the case, but to aid it in such
inquiry or trial.

(3). Neither the accused nor his agents shall be entitled to call for such diaries, nor shall he or they
be entitled to see them merely because they are referred to by the court; but, if they are used by
the police officer who made them to refresh his memory, or if the court uses them for the purpose
of contradicting such police officer, the provisions of Section 161 or Section 145, as the case may
be, of Indian Evidence Act, 1872, shall apply.

It means this section deals with or shows that what a “special” diary of a police-officer making an
investigation should contain. Every police-officer making an investigation shall enter his
proceedings in a diary which may be used at the trial or inquiry, not as evidence in the case but aid
the court in such inquiry or an investigation started under section-174 of the code

The object of recording “case diaries” under this section is to enable courts to check the method
of investigation by the police. The entries in a police diary should be made with promptness in
sufficient details mentioning all significant facts on careful chronological order and with complete
objectivity. The haphazard maintenance of a police case diary not only does no credit to those
responsible for maintaining it but defeats the very purpose for which it required to be maintained.

So we can say that this section does not deal with the recording of any statement made by
witnesses. Oral statements of witnesses should not be recorded in the diary. Similarly, the court
should not while recording the evidence of investigating office record anything which came to the
knowledge of such an officer during the investigation of the other case.

A diary kept under this section cannot be used as evidence of any data, fact or statement contained
therein, but it can be used for the purpose of assisting the court in inquiry or trial by enabling it to
discover means for further elucidation of points which need clearing up before justice can be done.
12 mark

1. S. 218 Separate charges for distinct offences

Description
1. For every distinct offence of which any person is accused there shall be a separate
charge and every such charge shall be tried separately;
Provided that where the accused person, by an application in writing, so desires and the
Magistrate is of opinion that such person is not likely to be prejudiced thereby the
Magistrate may try together all or any number of the charges framed against such
person.
2. Nothing in Sub-Section (1) shall affect the operation of the provisions of sections 219,
220, 221 and 223.

Three offences of same kind within year may be

S. 219 charged together

Description
1. When a person is accused of more offences than one of the same kind committed within
the space of twelve months from the first to the last of such offences, whether in respect
of the same person or not, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, any number
of them not exceeding three.
2. Offences are of the same kind when they are punishable with the same amount of
punishment under the same section of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) or of any
special or local laws;
Provided that, for the purposes of this section, an offence punishable under section 379
of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860) shall be deemed to be an offence of the same kind
as an offence punishable under section 380 of the said Code, and that an offence
punishable under any section of the said Code, or of any special or local law, shall be
deemed to be an offence of the same kind as an attempt to commit such offence, when
such an attempt is an offence.

S. 220 Trial for more than one offence

Description
 1. If, in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction, more
offences than one are committed by the same person, he may be charged with, and tried
at one trial for, every such offence.
2. When a person charged with one or more offences of criminal breach of trust or
dishonest misappropriation of property as provided in Sub-Section (2) of section 212 or
in Sub-Section (1) of section 219, is accused of committing, for the purpose of
facilitating or concealing the commission of that offence or those offences, one or more
offences of falsification of accounts, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial for,
every such offence.
3. If the acts alleged constitute an offence falling within two or more separate definitions of
any law in force for the time being by which offences are defined or punished, the
person accused of them may be charged with, and tried at one trial for, each of such
offences.
4. If several acts, of which one or more than one would by itself or themselves constitute
an offence, constitute when combined a different offence, the person accused of them
may be charged with, and tried at one trial for the offence constituted by such acts when
combined, and for any offence constituted by any one, or more, or such acts.
5. Nothing contained in this section shall affect section 71 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of
1860).

Where it is doubtful what offence has been

S. 221
committed

Description
1. If a single act or series of acts is of such a nature that it is doubtful which of several
offences the facts which can be proved will constitute, the accused may be charged with
having committed all or any of such offences, and any number of such charges may be
tried at once; or he may be charged in the alternative with having committed some one
of the said offences.
2. If in such a case the accused is charged with one offence, and it appears in evidence that
he committed a different offence for which he might have been charged under the
provisions of Sub-Section (1), he may be convicted of the offence which he is shown to
have committed, although he was not charged with it.

S. 223 What persons may be charged jointly

Description
The following persons may be charged and tried together, namely;

1. persons accused of the same offence committed in the course of the same transaction;
 2. persons accused of an offence and persons accused of abetment of, or attempt to
commit, such offence;
3. persons accused of more than one offence of the same kind, within the meaning of
section 219 committed by them jointly within the period of twelve months;
4. persons accused of different offences committed in the course of the same transaction;
5. persons accused of an offence which includes theft, extortion, cheating, or criminal
misappropriation, and persons accused of receiving or retaining, or assisting in the
disposal or concealment of, property possession of which is alleged to have been
transferred by any such offence committed by the first-named persons, or of abetment of
or attempting to commit any such last-named offence;
6. persons accused of offences under sections 411 and 414 of the Indian Penal Code (45 of
1860) or either of those sections in respect of stolen property the possession of which
has been transferred by one offence;
7. persons accused of any offence under Chapter XII of the Indian Penal Code (45 of 1860)
relating to counterfeit coin and persons accused of any other offence under the said
Chapter relating to the same coin, or of abetment of or attempting to commit any such
offence; and the provisions contained in the former part of this Chapter shall, so far as
may be, apply to all such charges;
Provided that where a number of persons are charged with separate offences and such
persons do not fall within any of the categories specified in this section, the Magistrate
or Court of Sessions may, if such persons by an application in writing, so desire, and if
he is satisfied that such persons would not be prejudicially affected thereby, and it is
expedient so to do, try all such persons together.

2.

Chapter 29 – Appeals

Section 372 – No appeal to lie unless otherwise provided

Section 373 – Appeal from orders requiring security or refusal to accept or rejecting surety
for keeping peace or good behaviour

Section 374 – Appeals from convictions

Section 375 – No appeal in certain cases when accused pleads guilty

Section 376 – No appeal in petty cases

Section 377 – Appeal by the State Government against sentence

Section 378 – Appeal in case of acquittal

Section 379 – Appeal against conviction by High Court in certain cases

Section 380 – Special right of appeal in certain cases

Section 381 – Appeal to Court of Session how heard

Section 382 – Petition of appeal

Section 383 – Procedure when appellant in jail

Section 384 – Summary dismissal of appeal

Section 385 – Procedure for hearing appeals not dismissed summarily

Section 386 – Powers of the Appellate Court

Section 387 – Judgments of subordinate Appellate Court

Section 388 – Order of High Court on appeal to be certified to lower Court

Section 389 – Suspension of sentence pending the appeal; release of appellant on bail

Section 390 – Arrest of accused in appeal from acquittal

Section 391 – Appellate Court may take further evidence or direct it to be taken

Section 392 – Procedure where Judges of Court of appeal are equally divided

Section 393 – Finality of judgments and orders on appeal

Section 394 – Abatement of appeals

3. Criminal prosecution develops in a series of stages, beginning with an arrest and ending
at a point before, during or after trial. The majority of criminal cases terminate when a
criminal defendant accepts a plea bargain offered by the prosecution. In a plea bargain,
the defendant chooses to plead guilty before trial to the charged offenses, or to lesser
charges in exchange for a more lenient sentence or the dismissal of related charges.

Arrest

Criminal prosecution typically begins with an arrest by a police officer. A police officer may
arrest a person if (1) the officer observes the person committing a crime; (2) the officer has
probable cause to believe that a crime has been committed by that person; or (3) the officer
makes the arrest under the authority of a valid arrest warrant. After the arrest, the police books
the suspect. When the police complete the booking process, they place the suspect in custody. If
the suspect commited a minor offense, the policy may issue a citation to the suspect with
instructions to appear in court at a later date.

Bail

If a suspect in police custody is granted bail, the suspect may pay the bail amount in exchange
for a release. Release on bail is contingent on the suspect's promise to appear at all scheduled
court proceedings. Bail may be granted to a suspect immediately after booking or at a later bail
review hearing. Alternatively, a suspect may be released on his "own recognizance." A suspect
released on his own recognizance need not post bail, but must promise in writing to appear at all
scheduled court appearances. Own recognizance release is granted after the court considers the
seriousness of the offense, and the suspect's criminal record, threat to the community and ties to
family and employment.

Arraignment

The suspect makes his first court appearance at the arraignment. During arraignment, the judge
reads the charges filed against the defendant in the complaint and the defendant chooses to plead
"guilty," "not guilty" or "no contest" to those charges. The judge will also review the defendant's
bail and set dates for future proceedings.

Preliminary Hearing or Grand Jury Proceedings

The government generally brings criminal charges in one of two ways: by a "bill of information"
secured by a preliminary hearing or by grand jury indictment. In the federal system, cases must
be brought by indictment. States, however, are free to use either process. Both preliminary
hearings and grand juries are used to establish the existence of probable cause. If there is no
finding of probable cause, a defendant will not be forced to stand trial.

A preliminary hearing, or preliminary examination, is an adversarial proceeding in which

counsel questions witnesses and both parties makes arguments. The judge then makes the
ultimate finding of probable cause. The grand jury, on the other hand, hears only from the
prosecutor. The grand jury may call their own witnesses and request that further investigations
be performed. The grand jury then decides whether sufficient evidence has been presented to
indict the defendant.

Pre-Trial Motions

Pre-trial motions are brought by both the prosecution and the defense in order to resolve final
issues and establish what evidence and testimony will be admissible at trial.

Trial

At trial, the judge or the jury will either find the defendant guilty or not guilty. The prosecution
bears the burden of proof in a criminal trial. Thus, the prosecutor must prove beyond a
reasonable doubt that the defendant committed the crimes charged. The defendant has a
constitutional right to a jury trial in most criminal matters. A jury or judge makes the final
determination of guilt or innocence after listening to opening and closing statements,
examination and cross-examination of witnesses and jury instructions. If the jury fails to reach a
unanimous verdict, the judge may declare a mistrial, and the case will either be dismissed or a
new jury will be chosen. If a judge or jury finds the defendant guilty, the court will sentence the
defendant.

Sentencing

During the sentencing phase of a criminal case, the court determines the appropriate punishment
for the convicted defendant. In determining a suitable sentence, the court will consider a number
of factors, including the nature and severity of the crime, the defendant's criminal history, the
defendant's personal circumstances and the degree of remorse felt by the defendant.

Appeal

An individual convicted of a crime may ask that his or her case be reviewed by a higher court. If
that court finds an error in the case or the sentence imposed, the court may reverse the conviction
or find that the case should be re-tried.

4. Types Of Bail In India

There are commonly 3 types of bail in India which a person can apply depending upon the stage
of the criminal matter:

1. Regular Bail: A regular bail can be granted to a person who has already been arrested
and kept in police custody. A person can file a bail application for regular bail under
Section 437 and 439 of the CrPC.
2. Interim Bail: Interim bail is a bail granted for a short period of time. Interim bail is
granted to an accused before the hearing for the grant of regular bail or anticipatory bail.
3. Anticipatory Bail: A person who discerns that he may be arrested by the police for a
non-bailable offence, can file an application for anticipatory bail. It is like an advance
bail obtained under Section 438 of the CrPC. A bail under Section 438 is a bail before
arrest and a person cannot be arrested by the police if the anticipatory bail has been
granted by the court.

Bail’ has been defined in law lexicon as security for the appearance of the accused person on giving
which he is released pending trial or investigation. Bail is to procure the release of a person from
legal custody, by undertaking that he shall appear at the time and place designated and submit
himself to the jurisdiction and judgement of the court.
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 has classified all offences into two categories :

a. Bailable Offences
b. Non-Bailable Offences

Bailable Offences

When any person accused for a bailable offence as mentioned in the first schedule of the code, is
arrested or detained without warrant by an officer in charge of a police station or appears or brought
before a court. He is entitled to claim bail as a matter of right at any stage of proceeding while in
the custody of the said officer. In the case of bailable offence the bail is granted by the court or
such officer in charge of police station as they deem fit.

Non-Bailable Offences

If a person accused of non-bailable offence is arrested or detained without warrant, that does not
mean that the person accused of such offence shall not be released on bail; but herein such a case
bail is not a matter of right, but only a privilege to be granted at discretion of the court.

Circumstances in which release on bail is imperative

Cases other than those of non-bailable offences

Where a person is unable to give a bail within a week of the date of his arrest, it shall be sufficient
ground for the officer or the court to presume that he is an indigent for the purpose of the proviso
of section 436 (I).

Section 50 (2) makes it obligatory for a police officer arresting such a person without a warrant to
inform him of his right to be released on bail.

Right to be released on bail if investigations are not completed within the prescribed number
of days

Whenever an accused is arrested and detain in custody by the police during investigation cannot
be completed within 24 hours as fixed by section 57, the accused person must be forwarded to a
judicial Magistrate. It has been ruled that request for remand can be opposed by an application for
bail moved earlier is pending and posted for a future date. If the further detention of the accused
person becomes necessary for the completion of the investigation, the Magistrate may authorize
the detention of the accused otherwise than in the custody of the police. But the total period of
detention in such a case shall not exceed 90 days where the investigation relates to an offence
punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term of 10 years or more; and
such period of detention shall not exceed 60 days where the investigation relates to any other
offence. This provision is applicable irrespective of the fact that the offence of which the detained
person is accused of non-bailable offence.
No reasonable grounds for believing the accused guilty of a non-bailable offence but
sufficient grounds for further inquiry

When there are no reasonable grounds to believe that the accused was involved in the commission
of a non-bailable offence, the accused shall be released on bail under section 436 of the Code of
Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Trial not concluded within 60 days

The trial of a person accused of any non-bailable offence is not concluded within a period of 60
days from the first date fixed for taking evidence in the case, such person shall, if he is in custody
during the whole of the said period, be released on bail to the satisfaction of he Magistrate, unless
the reason to be recorded in writing the Magistrate otherwise directs.

It may be noted that the cases triable by a Court of Session are not within the purview of this
provision. If the offence is exclusively triable by Session Judge the Magistrate should direct the
accused to approach the Session Court.

Release on bail after conclusion of the trial but before the judgment is delivered

At any time after the conclusion of the trial of a person accused of a non-bailable offence and
before the judgement is delivered, the court on believing on facts and grounds that proving accused
is not guilty of the offense than it shall release the accused.

Guidelines while granting bail in Non-bailable offences

a. Enormity of the charge

b. Nature of the accusation
c. Severity of the punishment which the conviction will entail
d. Nature of evidence
e. Danger of the accused person absconding if released on bail
f. Welfare of society
g. Health, age and sex of the accused
h. Danger of tampering the evidences and witnesses

Court may grant bail on the basis of principle of Parity. It has been held that bail application after
having rejected by an Additional Session Judge, would be maintainable in the Sessions Court. The
court may direct that any person under the age of 16 years or any woman or any sick or infirm
person accused of non-bailable offence be released on bail. A person who is habitual offender or
person previously charged with convictions of serious offences shall not be released on bail.
Although the High Court has concurrent jurisdiction with the Sessions Court to grant bail under
section 439. Any expression of opinion by the superior court is likely to prejudice the trial in lower
court. Therefore, only in special circumstances an accused person may directly move an
application to the High Court,

Grant of Bail with Conditions

Under section 437 of the code the court may impose some conditions according to which the
accused comply. It has been observed that power to impose conditions has been given to court not
to the police. The power to impose conditions can only be exercised where the offences are
punishable with imprisonment which may extend to seven years or more or where the offence is
under Offences against the state or offences against human body or offences against IPC.

Cancellation of Bail

The power to cancel the bail can only be exercised by a court not by police. Bail can be cancelled
by same court which grants it. The bail granted by a police officer can be cancelled by High Court
or Session Court powers granted under section 439 of the code. A Court of Session cannot cancel
a bail granted by the High Court.

Anticipatory Bail

Section 438 deals with Anticipatory Bail of the Code. It enables the superior courts to grant
anticipatory bail. It is the direction to release a person on bail issued even before the arrest of the
person. The law commission considered the need for such a provision and observed that influential
persons try to implicate their rivals in false causes for the purpose of disgracing them or for other
purpose getting them detained in jail for some days. Apart from false cases, where there is
reasonable grounds for holding that a person accused of an offence is not likely to abscond or
misuse his liberty.

Application for grant of anticipatory bail is made to the High Court or Court of Session. Normally,
it is to presumed that Court of Session be first approach for grant of anticipatory bail unless an
adequate case is made out for straightaway approaching the High Court directly. It is implicit that
the court making such an order of granting anticipatory bail is entitled upon appropriate
consideration to cancel or recall the same.

S. 27
Jurisdiction in the case of juveniles

Description
Any offence not punishable with death or imprisonment for life, committed by any person who
at the date when he appears or is brought before the Court is under the age of sixteen years, may
be tried by the Court of a Chief Judicial Magistrate, or by any Court specially empowered under
the Children Act, 1960 (60 of 1960), or any other law for the time being in force providing for
the treatment, training and rehabilitation of youthful offenders.
 Juvenile Justice (Care and Protection of Children) Act, 2015

19. Powers of Children’s Court.

1. After the receipt of preliminary assessment from the Board under section 15,
the Children´s Court may decide that—
i. there is a need for trial of the child as an adult as per the provisions of the
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and pass appropriate orders after trial
subject to the provisions of this section and section 21, considering the
special needs of the child, the tenets of fair trial and maintaining a child
friendly atmosphere;
ii. there is no need for trial of the child as an adult and may conduct an
inquiry as a Board and pass appropriate orders in accordance with the
provisions of section 18.
2. The Children’s Court shall ensure that the final order, with regard to a child in
conflict with law, shall include an individual care plan for the rehabilitation of
child, including follow up by the probation officer or the District Child Protection
Unit or a social worker.
3. The Children’s Court shall ensure that the child who is found to be in conflict
with law is sent to a place of safety till he attains the age of twenty-one years and
thereafter, the person shall be transferred to a jail:
Provided that the reformative services including educational services, skill development,
alternative therapy such as counselling, behaviour modification therapy, and psychiatric
support shall be provided to the child during the period of his stay in the place of safety.
4. The Children’s Court shall ensure that there is a periodic follow up report every
year by the probation officer or the District Child Protection Unit or a social
worker, as required, to evaluate the progress of the child in the place of safety
and to ensure that there is no ill-treatment to the child in any form.
5. The reports under sub-section (4) shall be forwarded to the Children´s Court for
record and follow up, as may be required.