Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 · Chapter XVII: The Charge · A.–Form of charges
Section 217: Recall of witnesses when charge altered
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024. It still applies to matters and proceedings from before that date, as the repealing law provides.
In plain words
When a charge is altered after the trial starts, the prosecutor and the accused can recall and re-examine witnesses about the change, unless the court records that it is sought for vexation or delay, and can call further material witnesses.
A simplified explanation, prepared with AI assistance from the official text below and checked automatically against it for numbers and cross-references. The official text is the law and prevails over this summary. Not legal advice.
Official text
Whenever a charge is altered or added to by the Court after the commencement of the trial, the prosecutor and the accused shall be allowed—
(a) to recall or re-summon, and examine with reference to such alteration or addition, any witness who may have been examined, unless the Court, for reasons to be recorded in writing, considers that the prosecutor or the accused, as the case may be, desires to recall or re-examine such witness for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice;
(b) also to call any further witness whom the Court may think to be material. B.—Joinder of charges
Corresponding sections were matched by comparing the wording of both official texts, and for the IPC and BNS, also against a published correspondence table. Wording, punishments and structure often changed, so read both sections before relying on the match.
Source: India Code (Legislative Department), the text of the Act as it stood before its repeal. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 217
-
Bansal Milk Chilling Centre v. Rana Milk Food Private Ltd. & Anr.
When can amendments to complaints be allowed after cognizance is taken; whether on facts, any prejudice would be caused to the accused-respondents if the amendment to the complaint, as prayed, is allowed.
- Itwari Asur v. State
- Manish Maini v. State of NCT of Delhi
- Luvjot Uppal @ Luv v. State of NCT of Delhi
- Dr Nallapareddy Sridhar Reddy v. The State of Andhra Pradesh & Ors
- State (Through) Central Bureau of Investigation v. Shri Kalyan Singh (Former Cm of Up) & Ors.
- Girraj Prasad Meena v. State of Rajasthan & Ors.
- Umesh Kumar v. State of Andhra Pradesh & Anr
- Bhimanna v. State of Karnataka