<h1>Courts Can Allow Amendments to Criminal Complaints if No Prejudice to Accused Under CrPC Rules</h1> The Supreme Court held that courts may permit amendments to criminal complaints if such changes do not prejudice the accused during trial. Emphasizing that procedural rules serve justice rather than hinder it, the court allowed correction of a typographical error in a complaint under the Negotiable Instruments Act, where the description of goods was changed from 'Desi Ghee' to 'milk.' The trial court had permitted the amendment before cross-examination began, but the high court reversed this, citing potential tax implications. The Supreme Court set aside the high court's decision, ruling the amendment was a curable irregularity and did not prejudice the accused. The court noted that under the Code of Criminal Procedure, charges can be altered if no prejudice results, and if prejudice arises, remedies like adjournment or new trial may be ordered. The ruling reinforces that procedural technicalities should not obstruct substantive justice.