- Case
- SUDERSHAN SINGH WAZIR v. STATE (NCT OF DELHI) (Supreme Court of India, 28-02-2025)
- Law
- Arms Act, Code of Criminal Procedure, Indian Penal Code, Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita.
Indian Penal Code, 1860: The judgment refers to Sections 302, 201, and 34 of the IPC. Section 302 relates to punishment for murder. Section 201 pertains to causing disappearance of evidence of offence, or giving false information to screen offender. Section 34 deals with acts done by several persons in furtherance of common intention. The appellant was arraigned as an accused in connection with a FIR for offences punishable under these sections. The judgment also mentions Section 120B IPC, which deals with punishment of criminal conspiracy, in conjunction with other sections.
Arms Act, 1959: The judgment mentions Sections 25 and 27 of the Arms Act in conjunction with IPC sections. These sections likely pertain to offences related to possession and use of firearms.
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: * **Section 226:** Relates to the prosecutor opening the case before the Court of Sessions after the order of commitment. The prosecutor describes the charge and the evidence proposed to prove guilt.
* **Section 227:** Deals with the discharge of the accused. The Judge discharges the accused if there is not sufficient ground for proceeding against them, recording reasons for doing so. The judgment emphasizes that after discharge under Section 227, the accused is set at liberty and ceases to be an accused.
* **Section 228:** Pertains to the framing of charge. If the Judge believes there is ground for presuming the accused has committed an offence, they may frame a charge in writing.
* **Section 245:** Mentions the power to grant a discharge in a trial of a warrant case, similar to Section 227.
* **Section 378:** Refers to the presentation of an appeal against acquittal.
* **Section 386:** Provides for the procedure for the hearing of appeals.
* **Section 389:** Applicable when the order impugned is an order of conviction, dealing with suspension of sentence pending an appeal against conviction.
* **Section 390:** Deals with the arrest of accused in appeal from acquittal. The High Court may issue a warrant directing the accused to be arrested and brought before it or any subordinate court. The court may commit him to prison pending disposal of the appeal or admit him to bail. The judgment discusses the object of Section 390, stating that if the order of acquittal is converted into conviction, the accused must be available for undergoing sentence. It also secures the accused's presence at the hearing. The judgment states that the power under Section 390 can be exercised in a revision against an order of discharge in view of Section 401(1).
* **Section 391:** Deals with the power of the Appellate Court to take further evidence.
* **Section 392:** Deals with the disposal of cases where the Judges composing the Court of Revision are equally divided in opinion.
* **Section 397:** Deals with calling for records to exercise powers of revision. The High Court or Sessions Judge may call for and examine the record of any proceeding before any inferior Criminal Court. It also allows for the suspension of the execution of any sentence or order.
* **Section 401:** Deals with the High Court's powers of revision. The High Court may exercise any of the powers conferred on a Court of Appeal by sections 386, 389, 390 and 391. Sub-section (1) is specifically mentioned as allowing the revisional court to exercise power under Section 390.
* **Section 427:** This is mentioned as the rationale for Section 10 of the decision in *State of Uttar Pradesh v. Poosu & Ors*.
* **Section 437A:** Deals with bail to require accused to appear before the next appellate Court. Before conclusion of the trial and before disposal of the appeal, the Court trying the offence or the Appellate Court shall require the accused to execute bail bonds with sureties, to appear before the higher Court.
* **Section 446:** Deals with the procedure to be followed if an accused fails to appear, leading to bond forfeiture.
* **Section 482:** Mentioned in conjunction with Section 390, indicating an application was filed under these sections seeking a direction against the appellant to surrender to judicial custody.
Bhartiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023: The judgment mentions that Sections 438 and 442 of the BNSS correspond to Sections 397 and 401 of the CrPC, respectively. Sections 427, 430, 431 and 432 of the BNSS are the corresponding provisions to Sections 386, 389, 390 and 391 of the CrPC.
General Principles of Law: The judgment discusses the principle that an ex-parte order of stay of the order of discharge should not have been passed by the High Court. It emphasizes the drastic consequences of such an order and deems it entirely illegal. The judgment also highlights the importance of the right to liberty guaranteed by Article 21 of the Constitution, stating that liberty granted to an accused under the order granting bail cannot be lightly and casually interfered with. The principle that bail is the rule and jail is the exception is also discussed. The judgment also discusses the concept of *prima facie* case and the standard required for granting a stay.
Constitutional Law: The judgment refers to Article 21 of the Constitution, emphasizing the accused's right to liberty. It states that if an ex-parte stay is granted, the Court must immediately hear the accused on the continuation of the stay, as the issue involves the accused's right to liberty guaranteed by Article 21.
