Hello Sirs,
Pleased comments on the below petition contents....
PETITION FIELD UNDER SECTION 216
R/w SECTIONS 217, 212 AND 468 OF CrPC
May it please your Honour,
1. Humbly submit that present Petitioner is Accused-A1 in CC NO: 1280/2008 in this Hon’ble Court, herein petitioner, and this petition is filed seeking an appropriate action based on the contents of this petition and this petition may be heard daily till disposal and this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to invoke relevant provisions of law applicable to contents of petition in the interest of justice.
2. Humbly submit that on 14/09/2012 this Hon’ble Court examined the petitioner U/s 239 of CrPC then clearly stated that “You/A1 lead marital life happily with complainant for a period of few months up to 25/04/2008” and at the time of framing the charge U/s 240 of CrPC the petitioner prayed this Hon’ble Court to consider all submissions and arguments that are part of CRLMP NO: 2157/2011 and CRLMP NO: 2816/2011 in CC NO: 1280/2008 on record, in view of Section 211, 212 and 213 of CrPC, and on 14/09/2012 this Hon’ble Court framed charge U/s 240 of CrPC in which all vague allegations, that are not disclosing date, time and place, are not considered as part of the charge and till date this Hon’ble Court never invoked Section 216 of CrPC to alter the charge in CC NO: 1280/2008.
3. Humbly and respectfully submit that order dated: 15/09/2014 passed by this Hon’ble Court in CRLMP NO: 2498/2014 in CC NO: 1280/2008 gives information to petitioner that new allegation(s) are considered as part of charge against petitioner but these allegations are not part of charge framed on 14/09/2012 and also the order passed in CRLMP NO: 2498/2014 is not giving information about all other new allegations that are considered as part of charge and expecting to disprove in trail.
4. Humbly and respectfully submit that words and circumstances present in Examination of petitioner U/s 239 of CrPC that says “You/A1 lead marital life happily with complainant for a period of few months up to 25/04/2008” and not stating any allegations occurrence from 11/11/2007 to 25/04/2008 in the charge U/s 240 of CrPC resulted below circumstances:
-
With respect to the alleged allegations allegedly happened between 11/11/2007 and 25/04/2008 petitioner not prepared with required materials/documents at the time of evidence of prosecution witnesses to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses in all aspects.
-
With respect to the alleged allegations allegedly happened between 11/11/2007 and 25/04/2008 petitioner not confronted prosecution witnesses with the documents/materials those exists and proves the innocence of petitioner.
-
With respect to the alleged allegations allegedly happened between 11/11/2007 and 25/04/2008 petitioner not elicited all contradictions and omissions of prosecution witnesses with respect to statements made earlier before public authorities in view of Section 145 of Evidence Act.
-
With respect to the alleged allegations allegedly happened between 11/11/2007 and 25/04/2008 petitioner not invoked Section 243(2) and/or 91 of CrPC seeking documents/materials/things to disprove alleged allegations allegedly happened from 11/11/207 to 25/04/2008.
-
With respect to the alleged allegations allegedly happened between 11/11/2007 and 25/04/2008 petitioner not invoked Section 173(8) of CrPC seeking further investigation to disprove alleged allegations allegedly happened from 11/11/207 to 25/04/2008.
5. Humbly submit that after considering Sections 212 and 468 of CrPC if law permits this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to invoke Sections 216 and 217 of CrPC to alter charge framed U/s 240 of CrPC on 14/09/2012 against petitioner to include allegations that are considered while passing the order dated: 15/09/2014 in CRLMP NO: 2498/2014 and this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to invoke Section 216(2) of CrPC to explain new charge to petitioner and after that the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to recall prosecution witnesses invoking Section 217 of CrPC for the further cross-examination.
6. Humbly and respectfully submit that on or before the accused is examined U/s 313 of CrPC the charge framed U/s 240 of CrPC on 14/09/2012 is not altered invoking Section 216 of CrPC whereas at the time of examination U/s 313 of CrPC the petitioner is informed that many new allegations that are not part of charge are incriminating against the petitioner and asked for reply and these circumstances clearly shows that this Hon’ble Court has considered many new allegations as part of charge which are not communicated to the petitioner U/s 240(2) or 216(2) of CrPC prior to cross-examination of prosecution witnesses and in these circumstances if law permits this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to alter the charge invoking Section 216 of CrPC to include all new allegations, present in the questions asked U/s 313 of CrPC, as part of charge that are required to be disproved during trail considering the below grounds:
a. Only after examination of petitioner U/s 313 of CrPC petitioner came to know about new alleged allegations that this Hon’ble Court wanted to disprove by petitioner and petitioner was not had opportunity to cross-examine all prosecution witnesses with respect to new allegations those were considered as part of charge against the petitioner and those were expected to be disproved by petitioner during the trail.
b. Before the Chief of prosecution witnesses the petitioner had no prior information about new allegations as part of the charge and petitioner had no time to prepare to cross-examine the prosecution witness with respect to new allegations those were considered as part of charge against the petitioner and those were expected to be disproved by petitioner during the trail.
c. Before the Chief of prosecution witnesses the petitioner had no prior information about new allegations as part of the charge and petitioner had no fair chance to collect documents/materials to confront with prosecution witnesses during cross-examination with respect to new allegations those were considered as part of charge against the petitioner and those were expected to be disproved by petitioner during the trail.
d. Before the Chief of prosecution witnesses the petitioner had no prior information about new allegations as part of the charge and petitioner had no fair chance to elicit all contradictions and omissions of prosecution witnesses with respect to statements made earlier before public authorities in view of Section 145 of Evidence Act.
7. Humbly submit that after considering Sections 212 and 468 of CrPC if law permits this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to invoke Sections 216 and 217 of CrPC to alter charge framed U/s 240 of CrPC on 14/09/2012 against petitioner to include allegations that are present in the questions asked to the petitioner U/s 313 of CrPC and this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to invoke Section 216(2) of CrPC to explain new charge to petitioner and after that the Hon’ble Court may be pleased to recall prosecution witnesses invoking Section 217 of CrPC for the further cross-examination.
8. Humbly submit that that order dated: 15/09/2014 passed by this Hon’ble Court in CRLMP NO: 2498/2014 in CC NO: 1280/2008 says the present case trail is for the alleged offence U/s 498A of IPC but no reference is made on applicability of Sections 03 and 04 of Dowry Prohibition Act and in these circumstances this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to alter the charge invoking Section 216 of CrPC on below grounds:
-
To enable the petitioner/accused to only bring relevant witnesses/documents/materials on record to disprove relevant allegations that are part of charge and this helps in avoiding unnecessary arguments and submissions from petitioner and respondent side.
-
After of charge gives clarity on what need to be disproved by the petitioner and such circumstances would enable speedy disposal of CC NO: 1280/2008.
9. Humbly submit that no prejudice would result in admitting this petition and in the interest of speedy justice through seedy trail this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to admit the present petition.
10. Humbly submit that while making prayers in this petition the petitioner relies on judgment of Hon’ble High Court of Madras date: 08/02/2013 passed in case of C. Selvakumar and Ors Vs. State represented by The Inspector of Police All Women Police Station (Central) Coimbatore. (Cr.No.38 of 2007).
11. Further submit that this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to permit the Petitioner to submit other grounds at the time of hearing.
P R A Y E R
12. Under the aforementioned circumstances, in the interest of justice this Hon’ble Court is pleased to invoke relevant provisions of law, including Sections 216 and 217 of CrPC, for altering the charge against petitioner in accordance with law and this Hon’ble Court may be pleased to pass any such other orders as may deem fit and proper to meet the ends of justice.
