Effect of omission to frame, or absence of, or error in, charge
Chapter 37: Irregular proceedings
(1) No finding, sentence or order by a Court of competent jurisdiction shall be deemed invalid merely on the ground that no charge was framed or on the ground of any error, omission or irregularity in the charge including any misjoinder of charges, unless, in the opinion of the Court of appeal, confirmation or revision, a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned thereby.
(2) If the Court of appeal, confirmation or revision, is of opinion that a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned, it may,—
(a) in the case of an omission to frame a charge, order that a charge be framed, and that the trial be recommenced from the point immediately after the framing of the charge;
(b) in the case of an error, omission or irregularity in the charge, direct a new trial to be had upon a charge framed in whatever manner it thinks fit:
Provided that if the Court is of opinion that the facts of the case are such that no valid charge could be preferred against the accused in respect of the facts proved, it shall quash the conviction.
The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act No. 46 of 2023). As printed in the Gazette on 25 December 2023. Later amendments, if any, are not included.
Related sections
- 506Irregularities which do not vitiate proceedingsCrPC 460
- 507Irregularities which vitiate proceedingsCrPC 461
- 508Proceedings in wrong placeCrPC 462
- 509Non-compliance with provisions of section 183 or section 316CrPC 463
- 511Finding or sentence when reversible by reason of error, omission or irregularityCrPC 465
- 512Defect or error not to make attachment unlawfulCrPC 466