Chapter XXIV

Section 308 CrPC: Trial of person not complying with conditions of pardon

New Law Update (2024)

Section 340 BNSS

TRIAL COURT

Court of Session, Court of a Magistrate

Punishment​

Procedural – Trial / Charge

Cognizable?

Bailable?

Compoundable?

Bare Act Text

(1) Where, in regard to a person who has accepted a tender of pardon made under section 306 or section 307, the Public Prosecutor certifies that in his opinion such person has, either by wilfully concealing anything essential or by giving false evidence, not complied with the condition on which the tender was made, such person may be tried for the offence in respect of which the pardon was so tendered or for any other offence of which he appears to have been guilty in connection with the same matter, and also for the offence of giving false evidence;
Provided that such person shall not be tried jointly with any of the other accused;
Provided further that such person shall not be tried for the offence of giving false evidence except with the sanction of the High Court, and nothing contained in section 195 or section 340 shall apply to that offence.
(2) Any statement made by such person accepting the tender of pardon and recorded by a Magistrate under section 164 or by a Court under sub-section (4) of section 306 may be given in evidence against him at such trial.
(3) At such trial, the accused shall be entitled to plead that he has complied with the condition upon which such tender was made, in which case it shall be for the prosecution to prove that the condition has not been complied with.
(4) At such trial the Court shall,
(a) if it is a Court of Session, before the charge is read out and explained to the accused;
(b) if it is the Court of a Magistrate, before the evidence of the witnesses for the prosecution is taken,
ask the accused whether he pleads that he has complied with the conditions on which the tender of pardon was made.
If the accused does so plead, the Court shall record the plea and proceed with the trial and it shall, before passing judgment in the case, find whether or not the accused has complied with the conditions of the pardon, and, if it finds that he has so complied, it shall notwithstanding anything contained in this Code, pass judgment of acquittal.

Important Sub-Sections Explained

Section 308(1)

This sub-section lays down the foundational conditions for initiating a trial against a person who was granted pardon. It specifies that the Public Prosecutor must certify non-compliance (either by concealing facts or giving false evidence) for the trial to proceed, and importantly, prohibits joint trials with other accused while requiring High Court sanction for prosecuting false evidence.

Section 308(4)

This crucial sub-section outlines the unique procedural safeguard for the accused in such a trial. It mandates that the court, at specific stages (before charge in Sessions or before evidence in Magistrate’s court), must ask the accused if they plead compliance with the pardon conditions. If compliance is pleaded and later found true by the court, an acquittal must be passed.

Landmark Judgements

Kishore Singh v. State of Rajasthan (1981):

The Supreme Court clarified the procedure under Section 308 CrPC, holding that when an approver’s pardon is forfeited, they can be tried for the original offence. It affirmed that the burden of proving non-compliance rests with the prosecution.

A.N. Venkatesh v. State of Karnataka (2007):

The Supreme Court reiterated crucial aspects of Section 308, particularly reinforcing the proviso that a person being tried for non-compliance cannot be tried jointly with other accused, and the requirement for a Public Prosecutor’s certificate to initiate such proceedings.

Draft Format / Application

Leave a Comment

Scroll to Top