CrPC § 225 — Effect of errors

Statutory text (English)

No error in stating either the offence or the particulars required to be
stated in the charge, and no omission to state the offence or those particulars, shall be regarded at
any stage of the case as material, unless the accused was in fact misled by such error or omission,
and it has occasioned a failure of justice.
Illustrations
(a) A is charged under section 242 of the Pakistan Penal Code, (XLV of 1860) with "having
been in possession of counterfeit coin, having known at the time when he became
possessed thereof that such coin was counterfeit," the word "fraudulently" being omitted
in the charge. Unless it appears that A was in fact misled by this omission, the error shall
not be regarded as material.
(b) A is charged with cheating B, and the manner in which he cheated B is not set out in the
charge, or is set out incorrectly. A defends himself, calls witnesses and gives his own
account of the transaction. The Court may infer from this that the omission to set out the
manner of the cheating is not material.
(c) A is charged with cheating B, and the manner in which he cheated B is not set out in the
charge. There were many transactions between A and B, and A had no means of
knowing to which of them the charge referred, and offered no defence. The Court may
infer from such facts that the omission to set out the manner of the cheating was, in the
case, a material error.
(d) A is charged with the murder of Khoda Bakhsh on the 21st January 1882. In fact, the
murdered person's name was Haider Baksh, and the date of the murder was the 20th
January 1882. A was never charged with any murder but one, and had heard the
1[trial], which referred exclusively to the case of Haider Baksh. The Court may infer
from these facts that A was not misled, and that the error in the charge was immaterial.
(e) A was charged with murdering Haider Baksh on the 20th January 1882, and Khuda
Baksh (who tried to arrest him for that murder) on the 21st January 1882. When
charged for the murder of Haider Baksh, he was tried for the murder of Khoda
Baksh. The witnesses present in his defence were witnesses in the case of Haider
Baksh. The Court may infer from this that A was misled, and that the error was material.

Source and verification

Source citation: CrPC (Act V of 1898) s.225: Pakistan Code portal consolidated official PDF 'THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE' (Act No. V of 1898, last amended 2017-02-16), p. 107, 108, ingested 2026-09-15. Automated transcription from official source (pypdf extraction, audited artifact repair); human admin re-check required before production.

Verification status: verified · Text status: auto_transcribed_verified_source

The record cites an official source, but its transcription is automated or only partly checked; a human re-check is pending.

Official Urdu text status: pending_official_urdu_text. Where official Urdu wording has not been sourced, Qanoon does not substitute an unverified translation for the statutory text.

Historical text notes

1 historical record is linked to this section. Historical wording may be incomplete or pending verification; it is not presented as current law.

• Date not confirmed: Consolidated current text as published in the official Pakistan Code PDF (p. 107, 108) — reflects all amendments recorded in the official footnotes up to ingest date 2026-09-15. Automated transcription; per-amendment…

Read this provision with care

This is a public reference to a stored statute record, not legal advice or a case-specific interpretation. Check the latest official gazette, applicable amendments and jurisdiction before relying on the text. A citation and verification label describe the record in this app; they cannot confirm that no later change has occurred. For a real legal matter, consult a licensed advocate.

Use the full CrPC section index to compare nearby provisions, or return to search.