Whether convict can challenge conviction on the ground of conversion of charge if he fails to prove Failure Of Justice?

 In paragraph 17 of the decision of this Court in Chandra Pratap Singh v. State of M.P.   MANU/SC/1100/2023 : 2023:INSC:887 : (2023) 10 SCC 181, while dealing with conversion of charge from Section 302 read with Section 149, Indian Penal Code to Section 302 read with Section 34 thereof, the above passage has been quoted with approval. {Para 23}

24. It would be relevant at this juncture to consider Section 464 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. On its plain terms, Sub-section (1) of Section 464 clearly indicates that no finding, sentence or order by a court of competent jurisdiction shall be deemed invalid merely on the ground that no charge was framed or on the ground of any error, omission or irregularity in the charge including any misjoinder of charges, unless, in an appeal, confirmation or revision, a claim of "failure of justice" has been substantiated.

25. Law is well-settled that in order to judge whether a failure of justice has been occasioned, it will be relevant to examine whether the Accused was aware of the basic ingredients of the offence for which he is being convicted and whether the main facts sought to be established against him were explained to him clearly and whether he got a fair chance to defend himself. Reference in this connection may be made to the decision in Dalbir Singh v. State of Uttar Pradesh   MANU/SC/0320/2004 : 2004:INSC:243 : (2004) 5 SCC 334.

26. Also, it is beyond any cavil of doubt that the burden to show that in fact a failure of justice has been occasioned is on the Accused. The decision in State of Uttar Pradesh v. Paras Nath Singh   MANU/SC/0973/2009 : 2009:INSC:669 : (2009) 6 SCC 372 can profitably be referred to in this regard.

27. We have no hesitation to hold that based on the above parameters, the Appellants have fairly and squarely failed in their pursuit to demonstrate any failure of justice, which would impel us to exercise power of the nature contemplated in Sub-section (2) of Section 464, Code of Criminal Procedure. We, therefore, see no reason to uphold the contention advanced on behalf of the Appellants to the contrary.

 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 1389 of 2012

Decided On: 25.09.2024

Baljinder Singh and Ors. Vs. State of Punjab

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

Dipankar Datta and Augustine George Masih, JJ.

Author: Dipankar Datta, J.

Citation: MANU/SC/1063/2024.

Read full Judgment here: Click here.

Print Page