Neutral Citation: 2024 INSC 642 [Download the Judgment]
Cause Title: K. Ravi vs State of Tamil Nadu & Anr.
Case Number: Criminal Appeal No. [Blank] of 2024 (arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 2029 of 2018)
Judgment Date: August 29, 2024
Quorum/Bench: Justice Bela M. Trivedi and Justice Satish Chandra Sharma
Paragraph 9 discusses the scope of Section 397 of the CrPC, citing the Amit Kapoor case. It emphasizes that revisional jurisdiction is limited and should be exercised sparingly, only in cases of gross errors, non-compliance with law, findings based on no evidence, or arbitrary exercise of judicial discretion.
Paragraph 11 explains that Section 216 of the CrPC is an enabling provision for courts to alter or add charges before judgment. It does not give the accused a right to seek discharge after charges are framed, especially if a previous discharge application under Section 227 was dismissed.
Submissions:
Appellant: The High Court erred in allowing the revision application and discharging the Respondent No. 2, despite earlier orders confirming the framing of charges.
Respondent: The charges should be modified as the accused was not present at the scene of the crime.
Decision:
The Supreme Court set aside the High Court's order, restored the Sessions Court's order, and directed the trial to proceed against all accused. The Court emphasized the limited scope of revisional jurisdiction and criticized the filing of repeated discharge applications as an abuse of the legal process.
Comentarios