Charge in criminal law is a formal written accusation made against the accused, specifying the offence with which they are charged, the law under which the offence is punishable, and the particulars of the alleged criminal act. Under Indian law, the form, contents, and procedure relating to charges are governed by Sections 211 to 224 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (now Sections 234 to 247 of the BNSS, 2023).
Legal definition
Section 211 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 prescribes the contents of a charge:
Section 211(1): Every charge under this Code shall state the offence with which the accused is charged.
Section 211(2): If the law which creates the offence gives it any specific name, the offence may be described in the charge by that name only.
Section 211(3): If the law which creates the offence does not give it any specific name, so much of the definition of the offence must be stated as to give the accused notice of the matter with which he is charged.
Section 211(4): The law and section of the law against which the offence is alleged to have been committed shall be mentioned in the charge.
Sections 212 to 214 require the charge to contain particulars as to the time, place, and person against whom the offence was committed, as well as the manner in which the offence was committed if this is necessary to give sufficient notice to the accused.
New law equivalent: Under the BNSS, 2023, Section 234 corresponds to Section 211 CrPC, and Sections 235-237 correspond to Sections 212-214 CrPC. The substantive requirements remain unchanged.
How courts have interpreted this term
V.C. Shukla v. State (Delhi Administration) [(1980) 2 SCC 665]
The Supreme Court held that the primary purpose of a charge is to give the accused clear notice of what they are accused of, so that they can prepare their defence. The charge must contain sufficient particulars to enable the accused to know the exact nature of the accusation. Vagueness or ambiguity in the charge prejudices the accused's right to a fair trial.
Willie (William) Slaney v. State of Madhya Pradesh [AIR 1956 SC 116]
The Supreme Court, through a Constitution Bench, laid down the foundational principle that errors in the charge — including misjoinder, non-joinder, or defects in form — do not automatically vitiate the trial. The critical question is whether the error caused a failure of justice. If the accused was not misled and there was no prejudice, the conviction stands despite the defective charge under Section 464 CrPC (Section 517 BNSS).
Aftab Ahmad Anasari v. State of Uttaranchal [(2010) 2 SCC 583]
The Supreme Court held that the court has the power to alter or add to any charge under Section 216 CrPC at any time before judgment is pronounced, provided the accused is given a fair opportunity to meet the altered charge.
Why this matters
The charge is a cornerstone of the adversarial criminal justice system in India. It performs the essential function of informing the accused precisely what criminal conduct is attributed to them, enabling the preparation of a meaningful defence. Without a properly framed charge, no conviction can ordinarily stand.
For practitioners, attention to the form and content of the charge is critical at two stages. At the pre-trial stage, the defence must scrutinise the charge for defects that may warrant a discharge application. During and after trial, the defence may argue that a defective or misleading charge caused prejudice, potentially vitiating the trial under Section 464 CrPC (Section 517 BNSS). However, the Supreme Court has consistently held that the test is prejudice, not mere technical non-compliance.
The rules on joinder of charges (Sections 218-224 CrPC / Sections 241-247 BNSS) are equally significant. Generally, each offence must be tried separately, but exceptions allow multiple charges to be tried together in certain circumstances, such as when the offences form part of the same transaction or are of the same kind committed within a twelve-month period.
Related terms
Related procedures:
Related outcomes:
Broader concepts:
Frequently asked questions
What is the difference between a charge and an FIR?
An FIR is the first information given to police about a cognizable offence, which triggers investigation. A charge is a formal written accusation framed by the court after the investigation is complete and the case is committed for trial. The FIR precedes investigation; the charge precedes trial.
Can a charge be altered during the trial?
Yes. Under Section 216 CrPC (Section 239 BNSS), the court may alter or add to any charge at any time before judgment is pronounced. If the alteration or addition is made, the charge must be re-read and explained to the accused, who may be given an opportunity to recall witnesses.
Does a defective charge automatically lead to acquittal?
No. Under Section 464 CrPC (Section 517 BNSS), no finding, sentence, or order shall be deemed invalid merely because of any error, omission, or irregularity in the charge, unless a failure of justice has been occasioned. The test is whether the accused was actually prejudiced by the defect.
Can a person be convicted for an offence not mentioned in the charge?
Under Section 222 CrPC (Section 245 BNSS), when a person is charged with one offence but evidence proves a minor offence of a similar nature, the accused may be convicted of the minor offence even though not charged with it. For example, a person charged with murder may be convicted of culpable homicide not amounting to murder.
This entry is part of the Veritect Indian Legal Glossary, a comprehensive reference of Indian legal terminology grounded in statutory text and judicial interpretation.
Last updated: 2026-03-27. Veritect provides this content for informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice.