Particulars in the Charge: Section 23

The ordinary rule of criminal pleading is that a charge must state the particulars of the offence: the act, the date and the place, so that the accused knows precisely what he has to meet. Section 23 relaxes that rule for the misappropriation offence, where the wrong consists of many small defalcations over a period rather than a single identifiable act. It permits the charge to specify the gross sum and the dates between which the offence is alleged to have been committed, without specifying particular items or exact dates, and treats the charge so framed as a charge of one offence.

1. The Provision

1. Which offence. The relaxation applies to the misappropriation offence in Section 13(1), being the clause under which a public servant dishonestly or fraudulently misappropriates or converts property entrusted to him.
2. What may be stated in general terms. The gross sum, or the description of the property in respect of which the offence is alleged, and the dates between which it is alleged to have been committed, without specifying particular items or exact dates.
3. The effect. The charge so framed is deemed to be a charge of one offence for the purposes of the provision of the criminal procedure statute limiting the number of offences that may be charged together.
4. The limit. The period between the first and the last of the dates so specified must not exceed one year, which prevents the relaxation being used to frame a single charge covering a whole career.

2. The Position in Disproportionate Assets Cases

Section 23 does not apply to the illicit enrichment offence, and it is important not to transpose it. That offence is not pleaded in gross by concession; it is inherently a charge about a period, because what is alleged is the accumulation of resources disproportionate to known sources of income during the period of office. The particulars required are therefore of a different kind.

• The check period must be stated, with its opening and closing dates.
• The assets at the beginning and at the end must be particularised, since they are the foundation of the computation and the accused must be able to dispute individual items.
• The income during the period must be set out, distinguishing salary from other sources.
• The expenditure must be itemised so far as it is asserted, including estimated household expenditure, which is the item most often disputed.
• The resulting disproportion must be stated, usually as an amount and as a percentage of income.

A charge that alleges disproportion without disclosing the computation deprives the accused of the ability to give the account which the offence itself requires him to give, and is open to attack at the stage of charge. The statement of the case supplied with the charge sheet ordinarily contains the schedules of assets, income and expenditure, and those schedules are in substance the particulars.

3. Particularisation in Other Cases

1. Bribery under Section 7. The charge must state the demand, the acceptance, the amount, the date and the official act or public duty to which it related. There is no relaxation, and a charge that does not identify the work pending before the public servant is defective in substance as well as in form, because the connection with improper performance is an ingredient.
2. Section 11. The charge must identify the advantage, the person from whom it came, and the proceeding or business by reason of which that person was connected with the accused.
3. Abetment and conspiracy. The charge must identify the offence abetted or the object of the conspiracy, and the part attributed to each accused.
4. The consequence of a defect. A defect in the charge does not vitiate the trial unless it has occasioned a failure of justice, which is the general rule under the criminal procedure statute; what matters is whether the accused was misled in his defence.

4. Related Topics and Provisions