Summary
Refusal to discharge the appellant in the NIA prosecution was upheld because the charge-sheet material supplied a prima facie basis for the alleged conspiracy. At the charge stage the judge must apply an independent judicial mind and may sift the material for sufficient grounds, but must not conduct a mini-trial. The truth of the conspiracy allegations remained for trial, unaffected by observations in the appeal.
Issues
- What scrutiny is required when deciding discharge under Section 227 CrPC.
- Whether the material justified proceeding against the appellant on the alleged conspiracy.
Provisions considered
- Section 227, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973Limited judicial scrutiny of the record for sufficient grounds to proceed; no mini-trial at discharge. (¶¶ 16–19, 23–25)
Held
- The judge is not a prosecution mouthpiece and must consider the material, broad probabilities and basic infirmities. Unexplained grave suspicion can justify a charge, whereas mere suspicion may warrant discharge; proof beyond reasonable doubt is for trial. (¶ 16–19)
- The material concerning the appellant’s organisational role and frequent communications with the other accused before and after the incident supported a prima facie inference of conspiracy at this stage. Its truth and veracity required examination at trial. (¶ 23–24)
- Observations were confined to disposal of the appeal and were not to prejudice either party or inhibit independent adjudication at trial. (¶ 25)
Result
Appeal dismissed; refusal of discharge and framing of charges upheld. Trial to proceed independently in accordance with law, unaffected by the appellate observations. Pending applications disposed of.