Text

Dablu Kujur v The State of Jharkhand

FACTS:
The present Appeal is arisen from denial of Bail in the High Court of Jharkhand
(Ranchi), where a FIR was filed against the appellant under Section 302,120-
B/34 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 and Section 25(1-B) A of Arms Act, 1959 Read
with Section 26, 27 and 35 which was filed by the Sukhdeonagar police station
Case No. 238/2022 and the case was filed in High Court seeking Bail under Bail
Application No. 11895/2022 and it was denied by the High Court of Jharkhand
stating that the present case was at flag end of its trail and all the witnesses
has been examined by the prosecution except one witness and dismissed the
granting of bail and challenging the said Judgement Accused/Appellant
approached the present Hon’ble court grating the Special Leave Petition and
contended that incomplete chargesheet was filed under Section 173 (2) of
CrPC and the chargesheet was not submitted completely and he has a right to
seek Bail.


ISSUES:
● Whether non-compliance with Sec 173(2) CrPC invalidates the
charge sheet?

● What are the implications of incomplete reports under Sec 173(2),
particularly for original trails?
● Can a magistrate take cognizance based on a procedurally deficient
charge sheet?

ARGUMENTS:


ARGUMENTS ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT:
- Appellant contented that under Section 173(2) charge sheet should
contain all the details regarding the offence and here the police officials
failed to submit the charge sheet with full information.
- He also contented that he has a right that when the charge sheet was
not filed completely then he can seek bail to release.
- Hel also contended that right to speedy trail is a fundamental right to
the appellant.
- He also contented that incomplete chargesheet can give him a right for a
fair trial.
- He also contended that incomplete credentials of chargesheet violates
the judiciary.

ARGUMENTS FOR RESPONDENT:
- Respondent contended that the credentials which are not mentioned in
the chargesheet will not affect the trail process.
- Respondent contended that charge sheet which is field with time lapse
will not affect the trail progress.
- The respondent contended that bail for accused can’t be granted at the
flag end of the trail.
- The respondent also contended that credentials in the charge sheet can
be submitted during any time of the trail.
- The respondent denied to grant bail for respondent due to prosecution
examined all the witnesses except one witness and they stated that it is
impossible to grant bail for appellant.

COURT HELD:
The Hon’ble Supreme Court granted special Leave Petition which was filed by
the appellant. The Supreme Court also stated that charge sheet which is filed
under Section 173(2) of CrPC is considered as the primary document which
contains all the information relating to the crime like name, type of offence,

place of offence, any witness found, if the accused was released on bail who
gave the surety all the information will be disclosed in the charge sheet filed
under section 173(2) of CrPC. Every state has its own provisions in filing Charge
sheet and the process will differ from state to state some states like
Uttarakhand, Bihar and Jharkhand are not filling the charge sheet in
accordance to the provisions of Section 173(2) of CrPC and Sec 172 of CrPC is
to maintain dairy of investigation procedure and every state police house has
to follow all the provisions relating to Sec 173(2) and Sec 172 of CrPC. Hon’ble
Supreme also ordered Deputy Superintend of Police to produce all the
credentials of charge sheet in accordance to the provisions of Sec 173 of CrPC
and stated that charge sheet is considered to be primary source and basing on
the information int the charge sheet the prosecution and Magistrate will
proceed according to it.

Detail Information

Title

Dablu Kujur v The State of Jharkhand

Court

: supreme court., 2024

Lenght/Sections/Order/Rules

-

Language

English

Case Number/Citation

Criminal Appeal- 1511/2024 (Spec

Matter(s)

-

Councels

Appellant: Advocate AOR Vatsalya Vigya, Advocate Kumar Shivam. Respondent: Advocate AAG Sharan Dev Singh Thakur, AOR Shantanu Sagar, Azmat Hayat Amanullah, Ruchira Goel and Prateek Yadav, Advocates Vishnu Sarma, Puneet Singh Bindra, Nitya Sharma, T.G. Shahi, Siddharth Thakur, Adit jayeshbhai Shah, Sharanya Sinha, Keerti Jaya, Rajesh Ranjan, Attin Shankar Rastogi and Adil Vasudeva.

Statement of Responsibility

Pavani Priya. Akula, Sri Padmavathi mahila visvavidyalayam

See Also

File Attachment

Comments