```
```
Virendra Kumar v. State of Uttar Pradesh (2007) 9 SCC 211
Supreme Court of India
2007
(2007) 9 SCC 211
Criminal Law & CrPC
~6 min
Author: Gulzar Hashmi
|
Location: India
|
Published: 02 Nov 2025
Section 306 IPC
Section 222 CrPC
Section 464 CrPC
Dowry harassment
Minor offence conviction
Quick Summary
The Supreme Court said: a court can uphold a conviction for a minor offence like Section 306 IPC even when a separate 306 charge was not framed—so long as there is no failure of justice. Sections 222 & 464 CrPC permit this. On the facts, cruelty and dowry-related harassment were proved. The conviction stood.
Issues
- Was the High Court right to hold the accused guilty under Section 306 IPC even without a specific 306 charge?
Rules
- Section 222 CrPC: Court may convict for a minor offence even if charge was for a major one.
- Section 464 CrPC: A finding is not invalid only because no charge was framed, unless it caused failure of justice.
Facts (Timeline)
Jump here
Pushpa married the appellant, Virendra Kumar.
She faced humiliation over dowry and her complexion.
07 Oct 1982: Pushpa was found hanging; injury marks suggested beating before death.
Trial Court: Convicted accused; life imprisonment awarded.
Allahabad High Court: Confirmed conviction; also recorded guilt under Section 306 IPC.
Appeal to Supreme Court: Challenge to adding 306 without a formal charge.
Arguments
Appellant
- Conviction under 306 IPC is bad since no separate 306 charge was framed.
- Prejudice caused—defence was not prepared for 306 IPC.
Respondent (State)
- Sections 222 & 464 CrPC allow conviction for a minor offence without a specific charge.
- Evidence proved cruelty and dowry harassment; no failure of justice shown.
Judgment (Held)
- Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld.
- Sections 222 & 464 CrPC permit conviction for a minor offence even if no specific charge—unless failure of justice is shown.
- On facts, torture, harassment and dowry demand were proved; no prejudice to defence was demonstrated.
- The Court noted 113A Evidence Act need not be invoked; evidence itself was enough.
Ratio
A court may convict for a minor, included offence without a separate charge when evidence supports it and no failure of justice occurs. Here, 306 IPC could stand.
Why It Matters
- Clarifies charge defects don’t automatically vitiate convictions.
- Explains how courts treat included/minor offences at appellate stages.
Key Takeaways
- 222 CrPC enables minor-offence conviction.
- 464 CrPC: no-charge ≠ invalid, unless prejudice.
- 306 IPC can be sustained on proved cruelty.
- No need to invoke 113A if evidence is strong.
- “Failure of justice” is the key test.
- Appellate/revisional courts can apply these rules.
Mnemonic + 3-Step Hook
Mnemonic: “Charge or Not, Justice First.”
- Spot the minor offence included in facts.
- Check for any real prejudice to defence.
- Apply 222 & 464 CrPC to sustain conviction.
IRAC Outline
Issue
- Whether conviction under 306 IPC can stand without a specific 306 charge.
Rule
- Sections 222 & 464 CrPC allow minor-offence conviction absent separate charge, if no failure of justice.
Application
- Evidence proved cruelty and dowry harassment; defence showed no prejudice.
Conclusion
- Appeal dismissed; conviction upheld under 306 IPC.
Glossary
- Section 306 IPC
- Abetment of suicide—focus on conduct that drives the victim to suicide.
- Section 222 CrPC
- Permits conviction for a minor offence included in the major one charged.
- Section 464 CrPC
- Findings not invalid merely for absence of charge, unless injustice is shown.
Student FAQs
No. You must show failure of justice or prejudice due to that absence (Section 464 CrPC).
It was treated as an included, lesser offence that could be recorded under Section 222 CrPC on the proved facts.
No. The Court said the prosecution evidence itself was sufficient to sustain the conviction.
“No failure of justice” is the decisive test for sustaining convictions despite charge defects.
Popular & Recent Post
Comment
Nothing for now