Chapter XVII
Section 221 CrPC: Where it is doubtful what offence has been committed
New Law Update (2024)
Section 230 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Punishment
Procedural – Evidence / Witnesses
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(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.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 221(1)
This sub-section allows courts to handle situations where a single act or series of actions could potentially fall under multiple different offences. It permits charging the accused with all, any, or alternatively, one of these doubtful offences, and multiple such charges can be tried simultaneously.
Section 221(2)
This provision enables the conviction of an accused for an offence they were not originally charged with, provided the evidence clearly demonstrates its commission and it was an offence for which they could have been charged under Sub-Section (1) from the outset, ensuring justice without technicalities.
Landmark Judgements
Sampat Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1993):
This judgment reinforces that under Section 221(2), an accused can be convicted for an offence not formally charged if the evidence proves its commission and it was a plausible alternative offence under Sub-Section (1), provided the accused was not prejudiced by the lack of a specific charge.
Dalbir Singh v. State of Punjab (1962):
While extensively discussing Section 222, this Supreme Court ruling implicitly underlines that Section 221 applies when the same set of facts could constitute several *distinct* offences, allowing for flexible charging and subsequent conviction for a proven, though uncharged, offence if the accused had adequate notice of the underlying facts.