Calcutta HC Disqualifies Politician Mukul Roy from Assembly under Anti-Defection Law || Supreme Court Bans Mining in and Around National Parks and Wildlife Sanctuaries || Supreme Court Terms Delay in Framing Charges for 4 Years in Maharashtra Case ‘Shocking’ || Kerala High Court: Widow’s Remarriage No Bar to Compassionate Appointment || Delhi HC: Child Care Leave Not Absolute but Cannot Be Denied Arbitrarily || Bombay HC: Furnace Oil Not Part of ‘Plant & Machinery’, No Complete Sales Tax Set-Off || MP HC: Injury Not Required to Prove Attempt to Murder || Supreme Court: Tenant Must Pay Rent Despite Appeal Against Fixation Order Without Stay || Supreme Court: Counterclaim under Order 8 Rule 6A CPC Allowed Only Against Plaintiff || SC: Externally Procured Parts Given For Assembly, Not Used in Manufacture, Not Liable to Excise Duty

Delhi High Court Sets Aside Trial Court Order Which Misread Direction - (02 Mar 2020)

CRIMINAL

Delhi High Court has clarified that there is a difference between "addition" of charge and "alteration" of charge under Section 216 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The Court has stated that when the High Court had, in a criminal revision Petition, directed the Trial Court to add the charge under Section 304B of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) against the Accused, the Trial Court had erred since it "replaced" the existing charge under Section 304 Part I with Section 304B of IPC.

Tags : DELHI HIGH COURT TRIAL COURT ORDER WHICH MISREAD DIRECTION

Share :