Open Access Research Article
FRAMING OF CHARGE AND PROSECUTION OF EVIDENCE IN A SESSIONS TRIAL: A CRITICAL STUDY UNDER THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023
Abstract
A trial before the Court
of Session is the principal forum for the adjudication of the most serious
offences in India, and its fairness depends largely on two stages: the framing
of charge and the proof of the prosecution case through evidence. The charge
tells the accused precisely what must be met, and the evidence decides whether
the allegation is established beyond reasonable doubt. With the Bharatiya
Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) replacing the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (CrPC) from 1 July 2024, these stages are now governed by Chapter XVII and
Chapter XIX of the new Sanhita. This paper examines the statutory scheme,
traces the standards laid down by the Supreme Court for discharge and framing
of charge, analyses the rules on errors and alteration of charge, and studies
the manner in which prosecution evidence is fixed, recorded and tested. The
paper argues that although the BNSS retains the settled structure of the Code,
its time limits and provisions for electronic procedure will succeed only if
courts, prosecutors and investigating agencies adhere to them in practice.
Published Paper
Author Details
Authors: P. SINDHURegistration ID: 1013468 | Published Paper ID: IJLRA13468Approved ISSN: 2582-6433 | Country: Delhi, IndiaPage No.: 2498-2509
Article Information
FRAMING OF CHARGE AND PROSECUTION OF EVIDENCE IN A SESSIONS TRIAL: A CRITICAL STUDY UNDER THE BHARATIYA NAGARIK SURAKSHA SANHITA, 2023
Authors: P. SINDHU
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Volume 3
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- AbbreviationIJLRA
- ISSN2582-6433
- AccessOpen Access
- LicenseCC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.