Criminal Procedure Code 2010 · 2020 Revised Edition · Part 7 · The Charge
127. Effect of errors
Feedback & supportLast amended by an amending law of 2019.
No error in stating either the offence or the particulars that must be stated in the charge, and no omission to state the offence or those details is to be regarded at any stage of the case as material unless the accused was in fact misled by that error or omission.Illustrations(a)[Deleted by Act 15 of 2019]
A is charged with cheating B. How A cheated B is not stated in the charge or is stated incorrectly. A defends himself or herself, calls witnesses and gives A’s own account of the transaction. The court may infer from this that omitting to state, or stating incorrectly, how B was cheated is not a material error.
court
“court” means the Court of Appeal, the General Division of the High Court, a Family Court, a Youth Court, a District Court or a Magistrate’s Court (as the case may be) which exercises criminal jurisdiction;
A is charged with cheating B. How A cheated B is not stated 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 those facts that omitting to state how B was cheated was a material error.
A was charged with murdering Tan Ah Teck on 5 June 1996 and Tan Ah Tuck, who tried to arrest A for that murder, on 6 June 1996. While charged with murdering Tan Ah Teck, A was tried for the murder of Tan Ah Tuck. The witnesses present in A’s defence were witnesses in the case of Tan Ah Teck. The court may infer from this that A was misled and that the error was material.