CONVICTION FOR OFFENCE- NOT PART OF CHARGE

Conviction for the Offence for which charges are not framed

The fundamental principle underlying Sections 218 to 221 is that an accused person can be convicted of particular offence only if he was charged with the same. Exceptions to this principle are laid down by Sub-section (2) to Section 221 and Section 222 of Code.

Section 221 of Code says : (1) If a single act or series of acts is of such a nature that it is doubtful which of several offences the facts which can be proved will constitute, the accused may be charged with having committed all or any of such offences, and any number of such charges may be tried at once; or he may be charged in the alternative with having committed some one of the said offences.

(2) If in such a case the accused is charged with one offence, and it appears in evidence that he committed a different offence for which he might have been charged under the provisions of Sub-section (1), he may be convicted of the offence which he is shown to have committed, although he was not charged with it.

So provisions of Section 221 are clear enough to enable the court to convict an accused person even of an offence with which he had not been charged, if the court is of opinion that provision of Sub-section (1) apply to case, that is to say if a single act is or a series of acts are of such a nature that it is doubtful which of several offences, the facts of which can be proved, will constitute, then accused can be charged with having committed all or any of such offences and any number of such charges can be tried at once and by virtue of provisions of Sub-section (2), the accused though charged with one offence and it appears in evidence that he committed a different offence for which, he might not have been charged, he can be convicted of the offence which is shown to have committed.

In Nanak Chand v. State of Punjab, AIR 1955 SC 274, : Supreme Court held that Section 221 is entirely dependent on the provisions of Sub-section (1) of Section 221. The provisions of Sub-section (1) can apply only in cases where there is no doubt about the facts which can be proved but a doubt arises as to which of several offences have been committed on the proved facts in which case any number of charges can be framed. In these circumstances if there had been an omission to frame a charge, then under Sub-section (2) the conviction could be arrived at on the evidence although no charge had been framed.

Then Section 222 of Code says: When a person charged with an offence consisting of several particulars, a combination of some only of which constitutes a complete minor offence, and such combination is proved, but the remaining particulars are not proved he may be convicted of the minor offence, though he was not charged with it. [Section 222(1)].

When a person is charged with an offence and the facts are proved which reduce it to minor offence, he may be convicted of the minor offence, though he was not charged with it. [Section 222(2)].

When a person is charged with an offence, he may be convicted of an attempt to commit such offence, although the attempt is not separately charged. [Section 222(3)].

Nothing in this Section shall be deemed to authorise a conviction of any minor offence where the conditions requisite for the initiation of proceedings in respect of that minor offence have not been satisfied.[Section 222 (4)