Section 228 CrPC: Framing of charge

Chapter XVIII

framing of charge, magistrate trial, pre-trial procedure, prima facie case, sessions trial, Transfer of case

New Law Update (2024)

Section 243 BNSS

TRIAL COURT

Court of Session, Judicial Magistrate of the first class

Punishment

Procedural – Warrant / Summons Process

Cognizable?

Bailable?

Compoundable?

Bare Act Text

(1) If, after such consideration and hearing as aforesaid, the Judge is of opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence which—
(a) is not exclusively triable by the Court of Session, he may, frame a charge against the accused and, by order, transfer the case for trial to the Chief Judicial Magistrate or any other Judicial Magistrate of the first class and direct the accused to appear before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, or, as the case may be, the Judicial Magistrate of the first class, on such date as he deems fit, and thereupon such Magistrate shall try the offence in accordance with the procedure for the trial of warrant-cases instituted on a police report;
(b) is exclusively triable by the Court, he shall frame in writing a charge against the accused.
(2) Where the Judge frames any charge under clause (b) of sub-section (1), the charge shall be read and explained to the accused and the accused shall be asked whether he pleads guilty of the offence charged or claims to be tried.

Important Sub-Sections Explained

Section 228(1)(a)

This sub-section empowers the Sessions Judge to transfer a case to a Judicial Magistrate for trial if the alleged offence is not exclusively triable by the Court of Session, ensuring appropriate jurisdiction for lesser offences.

Section 228(1)(b)

This sub-section mandates the Sessions Judge to formally frame a written charge against the accused if the alleged offence is exclusively triable by the Court of Session, thereby initiating the trial process in that court.

Landmark Judgements

Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal (1979):

This landmark Supreme Court judgment established the principles for framing of charge under Sections 227 and 228 CrPC. It clarified that at this stage, the court needs to see if there is ‘grave suspicion’ against the accused, not meticulous examination of evidence, to proceed with framing a charge.

Amit Kapoor v. Ramesh Chander & Anr. (2012):

The Supreme Court reiterated the limited scope of interference by higher courts in the trial court’s decision regarding framing of charge. It emphasized that at the stage of Sections 227/228 CrPC, the court only needs to ascertain if there is a prima facie case against the accused, based on the material on record.

Chapter XVIII