Supreme Court Holds Accused Cannot Be Convicted for Section 364 IPC Without Charge as It Is Not a Minor or Cognate Offence to Section 302 IPC

Held: The Supreme Court held that an accused cannot be convicted for an offence under Section 364 IPC when no such charge has been framed, as it is not a minor or cognate offence of Section 302 IPC, and conviction without proper charge violates principles of fair trial and causes prejudice to the accused.

Summary: The case arose from a prosecution where the accused was charged under Section 302 IPC for murder but was ultimately convicted by the trial court under Section 364 IPC for abduction leading to murder, despite no such charge being framed. The High Court set aside the conviction, holding that Section 364 IPC is not a minor offence in relation to Section 302 IPC and that convicting the accused without framing a charge caused serious prejudice. The State appealed, contending that Section 364 IPC is a cognate offence and conviction could be sustained under Section 222 CrPC. The Supreme Court examined the scope of Sections 221 and 222 CrPC and clarified that a “minor offence” must share common ingredients with the major offence and be cognate in nature. It held that offences under Sections 302 and 364 IPC are distinct in their ingredients and objectives, and therefore cannot be interchanged. The Court further noted absence of evidence showing abduction or forceful taking, and observed that the prosecution case itself lacked essential elements to sustain conviction.

Decision: The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal filed by the State, upheld the acquittal of the accused by the High Court, and held that conviction under Section 364 IPC without framing of charge is unsustainable, thereby affirming that no interference was warranted.