Summary
The Court upheld refusal to discharge the accused from sexual-offence charges. At the charge stage, the material justified trial; challenges to credibility and the defence case required examination during trial. The objection that the informant and investigating officer were the same did not warrant discharge in this prosecution, which predated Mohan Lal, in view of the binding prospective treatment in Varinder Kumar. Trial was directed to conclude within six months.
Issues
- What scrutiny of prosecution material is permissible when deciding discharge and framing charges.
- Whether identity of the informant and investigating officer required discharge in this pre-existing prosecution.
Provisions considered
- Section 227, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Limited assessment asks whether sufficient ground exists to proceed, rather than whether the prosecution has established guilt; a mini-trial is impermissible. (¶ 9–9.5)
Held
- The court may sift material for the limited purpose of identifying a prima facie case and must consider broad probabilities and basic infirmities. Grave suspicion grounded in the material justifies charge; a roving inquiry or determination of ultimate credibility does not belong at this stage. (¶ 9.1–9.4)
- The material furnished sufficient grounds for trial. Submissions attacking the prosecutrix’s conduct and advancing the defence were left for the appropriate stage of trial, without determining guilt. (¶¶ 5.7, 9.5)
- The Court treated itself as bound by Varinder Kumar’s ruling that Mohan Lal operated prospectively. This prosecution had begun earlier. Identity of informant and investigator could bear on assessment of evidence but did not justify the requested discharge at the charge stage. (¶ 8.2)
- The trial court was directed to conclude the trial within six months of receiving the order, with cooperation from all concerned. The separate passport-release application concerned dates already past and was infructuous. (¶ 10)
Result
Appeal dismissed; framing of charges upheld. Trial to conclude within six months of receipt of the order. Pending applications disposed of; MA No. 2207/2018 disposed of as infructuous.