BASHIR KHAN Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) "it is necessary for the trial Judge who decides to frame charge after evaluation of material on record, to pass a reasoned order?" This moot question requires consideration in the instant case.

(2.) BENCH of Hon'ble two Judges of the Supreme Court in Kanti Bhadra Shah vs. State of West Bengal (1), indicated that if the trial court decides to frame charge, there is no legal requirement that he should pass an order specifying the reasons as to why he opts to do so. Framing of charge itself, prima facie, shows that the trial Judge has formed the opinion, upon considering the police report and other documents and after hearing both sides, that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed the offence concerned. A Magistrate is required to record his reasons for discharging the accused in view of section 239 Cr. P. C. , but under section 240 Cr. P. C. , there is no such requirement if the Magistrate forms his opinion about framing of charge. Even in a trial before a Court of Session, the Judge is required to record reasons only if he decides to discharge the accused (vide section 227 Cr. P. C. ). But if he is to frame the charge he may do so without recording his reasons for showing why he framed the charge (section 228 Cr. P. C. ).

(3.) IN Niranjan Singh Karam Singh vs. Jitendra Bhimraj and Ors. (5), was the case wherein it was observed as under: " At the stage of proceeding under Sec. 227/228 Cr. P. C. , court is required to evaluate the material and documents on record when taken at face value, disclose existence of all ingredients constituting the alleged offence. For a limited purpose the court may sift the evidence because even at the initial stage the court cannot accept as gospel truth all that the prosecution says even when it militates against common sense and broad probabilities of the case. "