Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 · Chapter XXXV: Irregular Proceedings
Section 465: Finding or sentence when reversible by reason of error, omission or irregularity
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was repealed and replaced by the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 from 1 July 2024.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 offences and proceedings from before that date.
(1) Subject to the provisions hereinbefore contained, no finding, sentence or order passed by a Court of competent jurisdiction shall be reversed or altered by a Court of appeal, confirmation of revision on account of any error, omission or irregularity in the complaint, summons, warrant, proclamation, order, judgment or other proceedings before or during trial or in any inquiry or other proceedings under this Code, or any error, or irregularity in any sanction for the prosecution, unless in the opinion of that Court, a failure of justice has in fact been occasioned thereby.
(2) In determining whether any error, omission or irregularity in any proceeding under this Code, or any error, or irregularity in any sanction for the prosecution has occasioned a failure of justice, the Court shall have regard to the fact whether the objection could and should have been raised at an earlier stage in the proceedings.
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 465
-
Kailas S/o Bajirao Pawar v. The State of Maharashtra
Issue arose whether the High Court was justified in ordering a re-trial; if not, then what would be the appropriate order that may be passed in this appeal.
-
Chandrabhan Sudam Sanap v. The State of Maharashtra
Matter pertains to the correctness of the order passed by the High Court upholding the conviction of the appellant for rape and murder of the deceased and imposition of death sentence.
-
Central Bureau of Investigation v. Jagat Ram
Respondent was convicted u/ss.7, 13(1)(d) r/w 13(2), Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 by the Trial Court. High Court acquitted the respondent holding that the findings of the Trial Court were based on evidence…
-
Fuleshwar Gope v. Union of India & Ors.
Issue arose as to whether the validity of the Sanction Order can be challenged at any stage; whether violation of s.45(2) of the UAPA r/w rr.3 and 4 of the 2008 Rules, if any, vitiates the proceedings, whether violation…
-
Sunita Devi v. The State of Bihar & Anr.
Need for a comprehensive sentencing policy. Trial against the accused under Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012 was conducted by the judicial officer in utmost haste and the accused was denied due…
- Union of India and Others v. Dilip Paul
-
Central Bureau of Investigation v. Narottam
In cases relating to offences arising out of the Vyapam Scam, respondents-accused filed applications seeking direction to supply a Hindi translation of the charge sheet filed by the appel lant in English language.…
- Mangilal v. The State of Madhya Pradesh
- Subhash Desai v. Principal Secretary, Governor of
- Qamar Ghani Usmani v. The State of Gujarat
- Jigar @ Jimmy Pravinchandra Adatiya v. State of Gujarat
- Gangadhar Narayan Nayak @ Gangadhar Hiregutti v. State of Karnataka & Ors.
- Pradeep S. Wodeyar v. The State of Karnataka
- Naser Bin Abu Bakr Yafai v. The State of Maharashtra & Anr.
- Gujarat Urja Vikas Nigam Limited v. Mr. Amit Gupta & Ors.
- M/S. Fertico Marketing and Investment Pvt. Ltd and Ors. Etc. v. Central Bureau of Investigation and Another Etc.
- Mukesh Singh v. State (Narcotic Branch of Delhi)
- Ebha Arjun Jadeja & Ors. v. The State of Gujarat
- Accused 'X' v. State of Maharashtra
- Kamil v. State of Uttar Pradesh
- State of Mizoram v. Dr. C. Sangnghina
- Girlsh Kumar Suneja v. C.B.L.
- State of Bihar and Others Etc. v. Anil Kumar and Others Etc.
- Ajay Singh and Anr. and Etc. v. State of Chhattisgarh and Anr.
- Securities and Exchange Board of India v. Gaurav Varshney & Anr.
- Anant Prakash Sinha @ Anant Sinha v. State of Haryana & Anr.
- Nanjappa v. State of Karnataka
- State of Bihar & Ors. v. Rajmangal Ram
- Chinnam Kameswara Rao and Ors. v. State of Ap. Rep. by Home Secretary
- Ashrafkhan @ Babu Munnekhan Pathan v. State of Gujarat
- Darbara Singh v. State of Punjab
- Bhimanna v. State of Karnataka
- Ajay Pandit @ Jagdish Dayabhai Patel & Anr. v. State of Maharashtra
- Nupur Talwar v. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.
- Rattiram & Ors. v. State of M. P. Through Inspector of Police
- Ashok @ Dangra Jaiswal v. State of M.P.
- Ashok Tshering Bhutia v. State of Sikkim
- Md. Shahabuddin v. State of Bihar & Ors.
- Jayendra Vishnu Thakur v. State of Maharahstra and Another
- Ramdeo Kahar & Ors. v. State of Bihar
- Bhanwar Singh & Ors. v. State of M.P.
- Nishan Singh v. State of Punjab
- Dilawar Singh v. State of Delhi
- Anil@Raju Namdev Patil v. Administration of Daman & Diu, Daman and Anr.
- Kamalanantha and Ors. v. State of Tamil Nadu
- State by Police Inspector v. T. Venkatesh Murthy
- K.M. Mathew Etc. v. K.A. Abraham and Ors. Etc.
- State of Madhya Pradesh v. Bhooraji and Ors.
- Basavaraj R. Patil and Ors. v. State of Karnataka and Ors.
- Nirmal Singh v. State of Haryana
- State of Hlmachal Pradesh v. Surinder Mohan and Ors.
- Rosy and Anr. v. State of Kerala and Ors.
- Central Bureau of Investigation Etc. v. V.K. Sehgal and Anr.
- State Through Superintendent of Police, Cbi/Sit Etc. v. Nalini and Ors. Etc. Etc.
- Shobhit Chamar and Anr. v. State of Bihar
- State Bank of Patiala and Ors. v. S.K. Sharma