### Trial Court Empowered Under Section 216 Cr.P.C. to Alter Penal Sections Post-Charge-Sheet Regardless of Police Opinion

The petitioner filed an FIR on January 1, 2025, alleging he was ambushed and assaulted by respondents No. 5 to 8 using sticks, fists, and kicks, resulting in a fractured finger.

Police registered Crime No. 02/2025 under Sections 115, 296, 351(2), 351(3), and 3(5) of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023.

Upon filing the charge-sheet (challan) on June 29, 2025, the petitioner discovered that the X-ray report indicating a fracture had been omitted/suppressed by the Investigating Officer, and Section 117 BNS (grievous hurt) was not included.

The petitioner approached the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking a direction for fair investigation and the filing of an additional challan.

1. Whether the High Court should exercise its inherent powers under Section 482 Cr.P.C. to direct the police to alter penal sections or file an additional challan after the charge-sheet has already been submitted to the Trial Court.

2. Whether the Trial Court has the authority to independenty assess medical evidence and add charges despite the police's omission in the final report.

The court primarily applied Section 216 of the Cr.P.C. (corresponding to the provisions under the new procedural law), which empowers the Trial Court to alter or add any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced.

It relied on the principles from *State of Haryana v. Bhajan Lal* (1992) and *Madhu Limaye v. State of Maharashtra* (1977), which mandate that Section 482 inherent powers should be exercised sparingly and only to prevent abuse of process.

It further cited *Kantilal Chandulal Mehta v. State of Maharashtra* (1969), establishing that a court is not bound by the opinion of the investigating agency regarding which sections of law should apply.

The Court observed that while the petitioner presented prima facie evidence of a fracture (grievous hurt) via RTI-obtained medical records that were missing from the police report, the matter had already transitioned into the judicial domain of the Trial Court at Joura.

The Court reasoned that once a charge-sheet is filed, the Trial Court is the most competent authority to examine the material.

The Court found that issuing a direct writ to the police at this stage would bypass the efficacious alternative remedy available to the petitioner: moving an application before the Magistrate.

The Court emphasized that the Trial Court is legally obligated to consider the evidence (like MLC and X-ray reports) independently of the police’s conclusions.

The Court directed the petitioner to file an application before the Judicial Magistrate First Class (JMFC), Joura, along with the relevant medical documents.

The JMFC was specifically directed to consider the application, examine the MLC and discharge tickets, and pass a reasoned order regarding the addition of Section 117 BNS in accordance with law.