Court’s Decision
The Patna High Court dismissed the petition under Section 482 CrPC challenging the Trial Court’s order rejecting discharge under Section 227 CrPC in a murder case under Section 302 IPC and related offences. The Court held that the plea of alibi, being a matter of evidence, requires examination during the trial and cannot form the basis for discharge under Section 227 CrPC at the pre-charge stage.
Facts
The case arose from the murder of the complainant’s elder brother on 26 February 2013 in Gaya allegedly due to political rivalry. The deceased was returning home after closing the JDU office when he was attacked near a betel shop by multiple accused armed with weapons. The petitioner was alleged to have struck the deceased on the head with an iron rod on the co-accused’s order, causing bleeding injuries, followed by further assaults by others leading to the deceased’s death. FIR was registered under Sections 341, 342, 323, 325, 307, 34 IPC and later Section 302 IPC was added.
Issues
- Whether the discharge application under Section 227 CrPC can be allowed in a murder case based on a plea of alibi.
- Whether the material related to the alibi collected during the investigation is sufficient to discharge the accused at the pre-charge stage.
- Whether the trial court erred in rejecting the discharge application by not considering the alibi material.
Petitioner’s Arguments
The petitioner argued:
- The Trial Court failed to consider material on record while rejecting the discharge petition.
- During the investigation, it was revealed that the petitioner was in Mumbai on the date of the incident, and the case diary (Para 73) noted the petitioner’s mobile tower location as Mumbai.
- The plea of alibi was evident and should have resulted in discharge under Section 227 CrPC.
Respondent’s Arguments
The State and the complainant’s counsel argued:
- The plea of alibi, being a matter of evidence, cannot be decided at the stage of framing charges.
- Mobile location evidence was contradictory as the petitioner’s mobile was also traced in Bihar during the relevant period, casting doubt on the alibi.
- The materials on record prima facie disclosed sufficient grounds for proceeding with the trial, and the discharge application was rightly rejected.
Analysis of the Law
The Court analysed:
- Section 227 CrPC, which permits discharge if, upon consideration of the record and documents, the judge concludes there is no sufficient ground for proceeding.
- The rule of alibi being a rule of evidence requiring strict proof during trial and not ordinarily to be examined at the discharge stage.
- The principle that at the stage of framing charges, a prima facie case is to be seen, not a meticulous examination of evidence (State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh, State of Tamil Nadu v. N. Suresh Rajan).
Precedent Analysis
While the judgment did not cite specific precedents, it aligns with:
- State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh (1977) 4 SCC 39: Detailed evaluation of evidence is not required at the charge stage.
- Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal (1979) 3 SCC 4: At the framing of charges, the sufficiency of ground for proceeding is to be tested, not proof of guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
- Niranjan Singh Karam Singh Punjabi v. Jitendra Bhimraj Bijjaya (1990) 4 SCC 76: Defence materials should be taken at face value but cannot be weighed meticulously at the charge stage.
Court’s Reasoning
The Court held:
- The plea of alibi is a rule of evidence to be established during trial through cross-examination and defence evidence.
- Discrepancies regarding the petitioner’s mobile location, including presence in Bihar during the relevant period, made the alibi plea doubtful.
- There was prima facie material to proceed with the trial, and the Trial Court rightly rejected the discharge application under Section 227 CrPC.
- The High Court, under Section 482 CrPC, would not interfere when the discharge rejection order was passed correctly, in accordance with law.
Conclusion
The Patna High Court:
- Dismissed the petition challenging the rejection of discharge under Section 227 CrPC.
- Affirmed that the trial should proceed on merits and the plea of alibi can be adjudicated during the evidence stage.
- Directed that a copy of the judgment be transmitted immediately to the concerned trial court for expeditious proceedings.
Implications
- Reinforces that the plea of alibi cannot be grounds for discharge under Section 227 CrPC and should be tested during trial.
- Clarifies the limited scope of interference at the charge framing stage and under Section 482 CrPC.
- Ensures that serious charges like murder involving political rivalry proceed on merits, maintaining the integrity of criminal trials.
Short Note on Cases Referred
- State of Bihar v. Ramesh Singh: Charge framing requires prima facie assessment.
- Union of India v. Prafulla Kumar Samal: Sufficiency of grounds at charge stage, not proof.
- Niranjan Singh: Defence pleas at the charge stage do not require detailed weighing.
FAQs
1. Can an accused seek discharge under Section 227 CrPC based solely on an alibi claim?
No, alibi being a matter of evidence is to be examined during trial, not at the discharge stage.
2. What is the scope of the court’s role while deciding a discharge application under Section 227 CrPC?
The court must determine whether there is sufficient ground to proceed, not conduct a detailed examination of evidence.
3. Does mobile location evidence establish alibi conclusively at the pre-trial stage?
No, discrepancies in mobile location data require trial scrutiny to determine the validity of an alibi.