What is the need to talk with PP for discharge U/s 239 Crpc

It is always better to get acquittal than discharge. Your advocate is right normally trial court are not discharging accused in routine manner. If you are discharged, you can again be made accused after securing evidence against you for the same offence in which you were discharged. Once you are acquitted, you can not be charged again for the same offence.

If after submitting the chargesheet or therefater the court gets satisfied that there is no prima facies case against the accused person then it can dischage the accused person in which the PP representing the prosecution will have the opportunity to put objection. Now why youir advocate is willing to talk to the PP in this regard is best known to him alone.

You have one option also, to approach HC under 482 Cr.P.c for quashing the Proceeding.

DEAR MASTANJI,

GENERALLY TRAIL COURTS ARE RELUCTANT  TO TAKE ACTION ON THE PERJURY/ACQUITTAL/DISCHARGE PETITIONS IN EARLY STAGES.  THE BETTER WAY IS TO MOVE H.C UNDER 482. AS EARLY AS POSSIBLE.

Dear Janardhan Reddy Garu, Trial court should receive the perjury application from accused being this application shows the investiagtion is not proper (police failed to say that allegation is false). Unless real fact is present on record, High Court can not exercise it's inherent powers to secure ends of justice. First accused should make sure that material in present on record in support of accused to get discharged or aquitted. Else no one can make any decision without supporting evidence. I say accused can file perjury, provided the said allegation can not be interpreted in any other way, when evidence is present to say the said allegatiosn are flase. Else evidence, in support of the accused need to be collected using CrPC-91 and then accused can go for discahrge or quash. It is not like lower curts are entertaining perjury or discahrge. they should else we need to move strategically. High courts are taking much time to dispose Quash petitions, whereas lower courts take les time to discahrge the accused on relevant grounds. Please correct me if I am worng.

Certainly High court will be reluctant to quash the proceedings at this stage unless you can prove that the case is palpably false and baseless and it is too premature to arrive to that conclusion at this stage. face the trisl and prove your innocence in the Court as you can not escape from the trial.

Dear Assumi, If I could prove case is false then no need of HC interference in that activity. I was telling that as per party argument case is false based on the evidences which are part of record. To do this party should make sure that the docs supports should be on file then only courts will see it to decide else no point is making the satements without proofs. Actually police should be good in collecting the evidences to support either accused or complainant. But police say that police does evidence collection only for complainant side. WHereas no one helps the accused to collect the evidence that support accused, I believe this is also job of police being police should see that on the complaint whether 182 IPC (part of charge sheet) is possible or not. For this police should listen accused version and try to get evidences in support of the accused as well. At the even when police could not judge then report should be submitted in court to ake decision. If not putting the provision for filing charge sheet u/s 182 IPC is meaningless.