CHAPTER XXI: TRIAL OF SUMMONS-CASES BY MAGISTRATES
This chapter details the procedure for “summons-cases” – minor offences where the maximum punishment is two years or less. This procedure is simpler and much faster than a warrant-case.
Section 274: Substance of accusation to be stated
- Simple English: This is the first step in a summons-case. When the accused appears, the Magistrate simply tells them the “substance” (the gist) of the accusation.
- Key Difference: It is not necessary to frame a formal, written charge (unlike in a warrant-case). The Magistrate then asks the accused, “Do you plead guilty, or do you have a defense to make?”
- Real-World Example: For a petty theft case, the Magistrate tells the accused: “You are accused of stealing a mobile phone from Mr. Sharma’s shop on June 1st. How do you plead?”
- Proviso:
- Simple English: This is a new provision. If the Magistrate, after stating the accusation, believes it is “groundless,” they can, after writing down their reasons, release the accused. This release has the same effect as a “discharge.”
- Real-World Example: The Magistrate reads the police challan, which states the “stolen” item was a pen the accused borrowed and forgot to return. The Magistrate finds this “groundless” as a criminal case and immediately releases the accused.
Section 275: Conviction on plea of guilty
- Simple English: If the accused says “I plead guilty,” the Magistrate must record the plea, as nearly as possible, in the accused’s own words. The Magistrate may then convict them right away.
- Real-World Example: The accused says, “Yes, I took the phone, I am very sorry.” The Magistrate records this statement and can immediately pass a sentence (e.g., a fine).
Section 276: Conviction on plea of guilty in absence of accused in petty cases
This section applies to the “special summons” (from Section 229) where a person can plead guilty by mail for very minor offences.
- Sub-section (1):
- Simple English: If the accused gets a “plead-by-mail” summons, they can send a letter to the Magistrate with their guilty plea and the fine amount specified in the summons.
- Real-World Example: You get a summons for a public nuisance with a ₹1,000 fine. You mail a letter saying “I plead guilty” and include a ₹1,000 demand draft.
- Sub-section (2):
- Simple English: The Magistrate can then convict the accused in their absence and use the money to pay the fine. This also applies if the accused sends their lawyer with a written authorization (an “vakalatnama”) to plead guilty on their behalf.
- Real-World Example: The Magistrate receives your letter and the ₹1,000. He passes an order: “Accused pleads guilty in absentia and is convicted. Fine of ₹1,000 is imposed and adjusted.” The case is closed.
Section 277: Procedure when not convicted
This is the entire trial in a summons-case if the accused pleads “not guilty.”
- Sub-section (1):
- Simple English: If the accused pleads “not guilty” (or the Magistrate doesn’t convict on a guilty plea), the Magistrate will proceed to hear both sides one after the other.
- First, the Magistrate hears the prosecution and takes all its evidence.
- Second, the Magistrate hears the accused (defense) and takes all their evidence.
- Key Difference: Unlike a warrant-case, there is no “framing of charge” in the middle, and the process is much faster.
- Real-World Example: The accused pleads “not guilty” to petty theft. The Magistrate says, “Prosecution, call your witnesses.” The victim and one witness testify (and are cross-examined). The prosecution then rests. The Magistrate immediately says, “Defense, call your witnesses.” The accused’s friend testifies (and is cross-examined). The defense rests. The trial is now over.
- Simple English: If the accused pleads “not guilty” (or the Magistrate doesn’t convict on a guilty plea), the Magistrate will proceed to hear both sides one after the other.
- Sub-section (2):
- Simple English: The Magistrate can, on the application of either the prosecution or the defense, issue a summons to force any witness to attend or produce a document.
- Sub-section (3):
- Simple English: The Magistrate can demand that the party requesting the witness first deposit money in court to cover that witness’s reasonable travel expenses.
Section 278: Acquittal or conviction
This is the final judgment in a summons-case.
- Sub-section (1):
- Simple English: If the Magistrate, after hearing all the evidence from both sides, finds the accused “not guilty,” they must record an order of acquittal.
- Sub-section (2):
- Simple English: If the Magistrate finds the accused “guilty,” they must (after a hearing on the sentence, if necessary) pass the sentence according to law.
- Sub-section (3):
- Simple English: This gives the Magistrate flexibility. In a summons trial, the Magistrate can convict the accused of any offence (that is triable as a summons-case) which is proved by the facts, even if it wasn’t the exact offence listed in the initial complaint.
- The Condition: This is only allowed if the Magistrate is satisfied that the accused would not be prejudiced (unfairly surprised or harmed) by this change.
- Real-World Example: The accused is on trial for “simple assault.” The evidence in court proves he didn’t assault, but he did commit “criminal trespass” (a similar minor offence). The Magistrate can convict him for criminal trespass if the facts supporting it were already part of the trial and the accused had a fair chance to defend against them.
Section 279: Non-appearance or death of complainant
This section applies only to “summons-cases” started from a private complaint.
- Sub-section (1):
- Simple English: In a private complaint, if the complainant (the person who filed the case) does not appear on the hearing date, the Magistrate must acquit the accused.
- The Exception: The Magistrate can choose to adjourn (postpone) the hearing to another day if they have a good reason to do so.
- New Mandatory Timeline: This is a new rule. Before acquitting, the Magistrate must first give the complainant 30 days’ time to be present. If the complainant still doesn’t show up after 30 days, the Magistrate will then acquit the accused.
- Proviso: The Magistrate can proceed with the case (and not acquit) if the complainant is represented by their lawyer, or if the Magistrate feels the complainant’s personal presence isn’t required.
- Real-World Example: In a private complaint for a minor offence, the complainant doesn’t show up. The Magistrate adjourns the case for 30 days with a “final warning.” On the next date, the complainant again doesn’t show up (and their lawyer is also absent). The Magistrate must acquit the accused.
- Sub-section (2):
- Simple English: This rule also applies if the complainant’s non-appearance is because they have died.
Section 280: Withdrawal of complaint
- Simple English: At any time before the final judgment is passed, the complainant can tell the Magistrate they want to withdraw the complaint.
- The Result: If the Magistrate is satisfied there are “sufficient grounds” (e.g., the parties have compromised) and permits the withdrawal, the accused shall be acquitted.
- Real-World Example: You file a minor assault case against your neighbor. After two months, you talk it out and settle the dispute. You and your neighbor go to court, and you file an application: “I have settled the matter with the accused and wish to withdraw my complaint.” The Magistrate allows it, and the accused is acquitted.
Section 281: Power to stop proceedings in certain cases
- Simple English: This section applies to “summons-cases” (minor offences) that were not started by a private complaint (meaning, they were started by the police).
- A Magistrate of the First Class (or an empowered Second Class Magistrate) can, for reasons they must write down, stop the proceedings at any stage, without giving a final judgment.
- The Effect:
- If the proceedings are stopped after the evidence of the main witnesses has been recorded, the Magistrate must pronounce a judgment of acquittal (not guilty).
- In any other case (e.g., if stopped before main witnesses testify), the Magistrate will release the accused, which has the effect of a discharge (case dismissed, but could be revived).
- Real-World Example: Police file a case for a minor public nuisance. The main witnesses (the public) testify in court but say they weren’t really bothered. The Magistrate, seeing the case is a waste of time, stops the proceedings after their testimony and “acquits” the accused.
Section 282: Power of Court to convert summons-cases into warrant-cases
- Simple English: This is for when a case that looks minor (a summons-case) turns out to be serious.
- The Rule: If, during the trial of a summons-case for an offence punishable with more than 6 months in jail, the Magistrate believes it is in the “interests of justice” to hold a more formal trial, they can switch.
- The Action: The Magistrate can convert the trial and “re-hear” the case using the more formal procedure for a “warrant-case” (which we covered in Chapter XX). They can also “recall” any witnesses who have already testified to re-examine them under the new, stricter procedure.
- Real-World Example: A trial starts for “simple assault” (a summons-case). During testimony, the victim shows the Magistrate a severe injury the police missed, proving the offence is actually “grievous hurt” (a warrant-case). The Magistrate stops the summons-trial, converts it to a warrant-trial, and recalls the victim to testify again about the more serious offence.
