Accused Cannot Withdraw Application To Become An Approver Once Pardon Is Granted: Bombay HC
Accused Cannot Withdraw Application To Become An Approver Once Pardon Is Granted: Explanation
1. Meaning of an Approver and Pardon
An approver is an accused person who agrees to give evidence for the prosecution against their co-accused in exchange for immunity or pardon.
Under Section 306 to 308 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), the State may grant a pardon or immunity to an accused to induce them to disclose the truth.
This mechanism is often used to break conspiracies or reveal crucial evidence in criminal trials.
2. Legal Framework
Section 306 CrPC: Power to grant pardon to an accused who agrees to give evidence.
Once the pardon is granted and accepted, the accused turns into an approver.
The approver is required to give full and truthful disclosure.
3. Bombay High Court’s Standpoint
The Bombay High Court has held that:
Once the pardon is granted by the competent authority and accepted by the accused, the accused cannot withdraw the application or seek to repudiate the approver status.
The pardon creates a binding legal status.
Withdrawal would undermine the administration of justice, as the prosecution relies on the approver’s testimony.
The accused’s commitment is not voluntary anymore; it becomes part of the judicial process.
4. Reasoning Behind This Principle
The pardon/approval process is designed to serve public interest by unearthing truth and aiding conviction of the main offenders.
Allowing withdrawal after pardon would lead to uncertainty, delay, and possible abuse of the process.
Courts recognize the finality and sanctity of the pardon decision.
It also protects the integrity of the trial and prevents accused from manipulating the process.
5. Key Judgments Supporting This Principle
a) Ram Prasad v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1962 Bom 205
Bombay High Court held that once the accused has been granted pardon under Section 306 CrPC, he cannot retract his acceptance.
The court emphasized the finality of the pardon and that the accused must cooperate in prosecution.
b) State of Rajasthan v. Kashi Ram (2006) 12 SCC 254
The Supreme Court observed that an approver who retracts his statement or turns hostile does so at his own risk.
However, this ruling also implicitly supports that once pardon is granted, withdrawal is not permissible in the earlier stage.
c) Ramesh Kumar v. State of Chhattisgarh, (2001) 1 SCC 618
The apex court stated that pardon is granted to extract truth and cooperation.
If the accused turns hostile or tries to withdraw after pardon, the prosecution may proceed with caution.
6. Practical Implications
Once an accused applies for pardon and it is granted, they must stand by their role as approver.
If they attempt to withdraw or retract, courts may:
Deny withdrawal.
Proceed with trial considering the approver as a witness.
Consider adverse inferences or consequences for the approver turning hostile.
7. Summary
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Pardon Granted | Final and binding legal status. |
| Withdrawal After Pardon | Not allowed to prevent abuse and uncertainty. |
| Reason | To aid justice and maintain trial integrity. |
| Bombay HC Judgment | Ram Prasad case firmly established this rule. |
| Supreme Court View | Approver turning hostile faces risk; no withdrawal allowed post pardon. |
Conclusion:
The Bombay High Court’s position that an accused cannot withdraw an application to become an approver once pardon is granted serves to maintain the finality of the pardon process and safeguard the integrity of the criminal justice system. This principle ensures that the mechanism of granting pardon to an accused to facilitate truth-telling is not misused or frustrated by attempts to retract.
RELATED Blog
0 comments