Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: Whether, at the stage of framing of charge, the accused can rely upon documents produced by the defence to seek discharge.
Analysis: The stage of framing of charge is confined to determining whether a prima facie case exists for proceeding against the accused. At that stage the Court does not weigh evidence or assess the probable defence of the accused. Materials collected during investigation may be considered for deciding whether the prosecution case discloses sufficient ground for proceeding, but documents relied upon by the defence and not forming part of the prosecution case cannot ordinarily be looked into unless they are admitted and unimpeachable. The Court approved the settled principle that if the prosecution material, even if accepted in full, does not disclose the offence, the charge may be quashed, but the accused cannot insist that disputed defence documents be examined at that preliminary stage.
Conclusion: The accused was not entitled to rely on his defence documents for discharge at the stage of framing of charge.
Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of framing of charge, the Court considers only whether the prosecution material discloses a prima facie case, and ordinarily does not examine defence evidence or disputed documents to test the accused's proposed defence.