 Some retrial practice and procedure is wanted to be learned by every professional or I say that whoever is connected with the law. And when we had requested Justice V. Ram Kumar to share his knowledge on this particular aspect. I am reminded yesterday some of our YouTube followers asked me that probably this is the only channel which takes us to the practical aspects rather than taking us to the knowledge simplicity through the law books etc. And needless to say that whatever we say every time that Justice V. Ram Kumar is one name which registers in everyone's mind to understand these concepts because he not only explains the things with the principles of law but coupled with the fact that how that law is developed in that particular journey. Though it's a short webinar of around 25-30 minutes but in a subtle manner of around 4 questions we will be understanding these nuances from Justice V. Ram Kumar and we are always indebted to him and it is sometimes a fact which I understand that because of the COVID we and Justice Ram Kumar have connected on the platform so many times and it seems that day in and day out we are sitting together discussing how this knowledge sharing can be done and we are always indebted to Justice V. Ram Kumar. Thank you sir for sharing your knowledge and for accepting our right for today also. Thank you Mr. Vikas. Good evening friends. The topic for today is Summary Trial with practice and procedure. Summary trial you get it in Chapter 21 of the Code of Criminal Procedure CRPC for short. We have already seen that there are only two types of criminal cases namely summons cases and warrant cases. Now summons cases you don't get a clear cut definition of summons case. In Section 2 WCRPC what is defined is summons case is a case in which is not a warrant case. So we have to necessarily find out what exactly is a warrant case. Warrant case is defined under Section 2 X of CRPC which means a case relating to an offense punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years. So two years and above it can go up to imprisonment for life or even death penalty. That's a warrant case. Now cases relating to offenses punishable with imprisonment exceeding two years and up to seven years are warrant cases tribal by magistrates. That is exceeding two years but up to seven years. Then cases relating to offenses punishable with imprisonment exceeding seven years and shown as tribal exclusively by a court of session are called warrant cases tribal by session judges. So there are warrant cases tribal by magistrates and warrant cases tribal by session judges. Seven years and above means session judges. They are shown as tribal by session judge, court of session in the sixth column of the first schedule to CRPC. Once we exclude warrant cases what remains is summons case. So summons cases are cases relating to offenses punishable with imprisonment up to two years. Warrant cases is two years exceeding two years whereas summons cases punishable with imprisonment up to two years. Still below are the cases meant for summary trial. So summons trial up to two years and below summons trial you get summary trial which is a condensed form of summons trial. Summary trial is a condensed form of summons trial. Here the sentence for imprisonment can be passed only up to three years that is up to three months sorry. It should not exceed three months. In summary trials the sentence should not exceed three months of imprisonment. We will now discuss a few questions relating to summary trial. Question number one what are the types of cases which can be tried in a summary way which all cases can be taken up for summary trial. Section 260 subsection 1 CRPC enumerates nine categories of cases which can be tried summarily. They are number one offenses not punishable with death imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years. That is offenses punishable with imprisonment for two years and below. Second category number two theft under section 379 section 380 or 381 of the Indian Penal Code where the value of the properties stolen does not exceed 2000 rupees. Theft of theft in relation to properties the value of which does not exceed 2000 rupees those cases can be tried as summary trial. Third category receiving or retaining stolen property under section 411 of the Indian Penal Code where the value of property does not exceed 2000 rupees. A theft is committed the person who committed theft sells it to somebody else that somebody else is receiving stolen property knowing that it is stolen property. Faults under section 411 of such a property where the value does not exceed 2000 rupees. Those cases also can be tried as summary trial under category 3. Fourth category is also stolen property assisting in the concealment or disposal of stolen property under section 414. That is a person who is assisting or assisting in the concealment or disposal of stolen property under 414 of the Indian Penal Code where the value of such property does not exceed 2000 rupees. A person assisting the thief in concealing or disposing the stolen property somebody commits theft that stolen property is received by a third person 411 IPC is committed. That person helps the person to conceal and dispose of the stolen property to strangers as genuine property and that property should not be above 2000 rupees. Such cases also can be tried under summary trial. Fifth category is Offences of lurking house trespass and lurking house breaking. Under section 454 and 456 of the Indian Penal Code. Then sixth category insult with intent to provoke a breach of peace under section 504. 504 of the and criminal intimidation punishable under the with imprisonment for a term which may extend to two years or with fine or with both under section 506 of the Indian Penal Code. These offenses can also be tried as summary trial. Then seventh category abetment of any of the foregoing offense. Any of the offenses abetment that is willfully helping the offender. He is abetting the offense. Such persons can also be tried under summary trial. Eighth category an attempt to commit any of the foregoing offenses which when such attempt is an offense. When the attempt is an offense the attempt to commit those offenses also can be tried under summary trial. Then ninth category is any offense constituted by an act in respect of which a complaint may be made under section 20 of the Cattle Trespass Act 1871. Cattle Trespass Act if a complaint can be given in respect of a offense under the Cattle Trespass Act that case also can be tried summarily. These are the nine categories of cases which can be which are enumerated under section 260 subsection 1 CRPC. Then from the CRPC itself you can find out other category. Ninth category I am sorry tenth category. Nine categories are already there enumerated under section 260 plus 1. Tenth category petty offenses. Petty offenses as defined under section 206 subsection 2 CRPC punishable only with fine not exceeding rupees 1000. Offenses which are punishable with fine only that to not exceeding rupees 1000 can be disposed of summarily under section 206 subsection 1 CRPC. Here the magistrate can issue a special summons under section 206 subsection 1 CRPC giving the accused an option either to appear in person or through counsel or to plead guilty to the accusation without appearing before the magistrate by transmitting through post or by messenger they said plea of guilty in writing and the amount of fine specified in the summons. You can also transmit through a post or by a messenger the amount of fine and also his plea of guilt. So he need not appear before the magistrate if there is a special summons is given to him where the fine amount is also indicated in the summons. So the moment he gets the summons summons will show that your computer search and offense if you want to plead guilty this is the fine to be paid. You can pay the fine in absentia without appearing before the magistrate. Then the third option is to authorize in writing his counsel to plead guilty on his behalf and pay the fine through such counsel that is section 253 CRPC. Section 253 enables the accused to authorize and educate to plead guilty on his behalf and pay the fine on his behalf by pleading guilty. So the fine specified in the special summons should not exceed rupees 1000. This is what the provisor to section 206 1 CRPC stipulate. Now there's one decision which I would like to bring it to your notice is a decision rendered by myself in Dramatian versus state of Kerala. 2010 volume 3 KLT 348 where the accused was charged by the police for offenses punishable under section 279 IPC. That is ration negligence driving and sections 132 and 179 of the Motor Vehicles Act. Trading the above case as a petty offense. The accused was summoned to the magistrate court concerned by means of a summons not issued by the court but issued by the sub inspector of police. It was held in that decision by this humble self that the first of all 279 IPC which is punishable with imprisonment up to 6 months and or fine cannot be treated as a petty offense. Secondly the magistrate for some issuing summons to appear before the magistrate police officer has no right or no business to issue summons to the accused. To appear before the magistrate police officer can give a notice to the accused to appear before him but police officer cannot summon an accused to appear before the magistrate court. That summons will have to be issued by the magistrate that is the decision in Dramatian versus state of Kerala. Since we are we were referring to the petty offense so first of all 279 ration negligence driving cannot be treated as a petty offense. Then the 11th category also under the CRPC. Section 206 subsection 3 CRPC authorizes the state government to specifically empower by notification any magistrate to exercise the power under section 206 1 CRPC in relation to any offense compounded under the section 320 CRPC or any offense punishable with imprisonment not exceeding 3 months or with fine or both where the magistrate is of opinion that having regard to the facts and circumstance of the case imposition of fine alone would meet the ends of justice. Such a category of cases can be notified by the state government concern in the state of Kerala to my knowledge there is no such notification. Therefore the category of cases punishable under section 206 clause 1 have not been enlarged in the state of Kerala. Then there is a 12th category there are see apart from CRPC there are other laws where also the special law may say that the offenses under or such and such offense under this special law may be tried as summary trial. Now the best illustration is section 143 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. Section 13080 of the Negotiable Instruments Act is an offense under chapter 17 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. This section 143 one of the Negotiable Instruments Act empowers a judicial magistrate of the first class for a metropolitan magistrate to try the offense under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act in a summary way in making applicable sections 262 to 265 of the code of criminal procedure. Empowering the magistrate to pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year and an amount of fine exceeding 5000 rupees. Even though it is a summary trial the power to try the case is give power to conduct summary trial is given. The sentencing portion has been enlarged and this is not understanding anything contained in the CRPC. So CRPC provisions will not apply regarding the limit of sentence but the trial is summary trial. Now the next question which codes can try cases in a summary way which all codes can try cases in a summary way. As per section 260 clause 1 CRPC the codes which can try cases in a summary way are one the chief judicial magistrate, two metropolitan magistrate that is being abolished by the new law. Metropolitan magistrates are being abolished. Three magistrate of the first class specially empowered, specifically empowered in this Bihar by the High Court. If a judicial magistrate of the first class is specifically empowered by the High Court he can also try offenses under the, try offenses in a summary way. Fourth category is over and above the above three that is CJF, Metropolitan magistrate and first class magistrate specifically empowered. Fourth category is the High Court can under section 261 CRPC confer on any magistrate of the second class the power to try some early any offense which is punishable only with fine or with imprisonment for a term not exceeding six months. So a higher category of offenses are also can be roped in under the notification empowering magistrate of the second class by the High Court. In the state of Kerala we abolished the second class magistrate in way back in 1992. So there are no second class magistrate of second class in Kerala but there are other states where magistrates of second class are still there. But even though the magistrate of second class if empowered can try an offense which can be which can which is punishable with imprisonment up to six months. The sentence which the second class magistrate can impose after a summary trial should not the imprisonment should not exceed three months. In view of section 262 clause 2 CRPC we pass on to the next question. What is the procedure to be followed for summary trial? Procedure to be followed for summary trial very important portion very important question and the procedure is very very important. See in view of section 262 CRPC the same procedure for trial of summons cases shall be followed for summary trial also under chapter 21 of the CRPC. But subject to the provisions under chapter 21. So I told you summary trial is a smaller form of summons trial a condensed form of summons trial. So same procedure only but subject to the provisions in chapter 21 CRPC. Now we will go to the procedure one by one. First procedure section 251 redway section 262 what 262 one is the summary procedure power 251 is the summons trial power. Section 251 redway section 262 one CRPC as in when the accused appears or is brought before the magistrate the magistrate will furnish him with the prosecution records. And then the substance of accusation that is the particulars of the offense shall be stated to him by the magistrate and he shall be asked whether he is pleading guilty or whether he has any defense to make. He will be asked whether he is pleading guilty or whether he is pleading not guilty in case he is pleading not guilty he may have a defense to make. But it shall not be necessary to frame a formal charge. There is no framing of charge in a summons trial also in a summary trial summary trial is nothing but a summons trial. There is no framing of charge because framing of charge is there only in a warrant trial graver offenses. Then there can be instances where when there is no trial at all instances when there is no trial when the accused is present before the magistrate pursuant to summons where the accused voluntarily pleads guilty. The magistrate shall record his plea as nearly as possible in the words of the accused himself and may in the discretion of the magistrate convict him. Section 252 CRPC. Section 252 CRPC empowers the magistrate to convict the accused in his discretion where the accused voluntarily pleads guilty. Voluntarily pleading guilty means the accused should tell the magistrate that I have committed this offense. I know the consequences of this punishment. I know the punishment to be imposed. I am not influenced by any extraneous pressure or any stranger. Nobody including a police officer has influenced me. I am doing it out of the prick of my conscience. I am voluntarily in my own accord pleading guilty. When the magistrate is satisfied that the accused is voluntarily pleading guilty, he can straight away convict him without a trial by virtue of Section 252 CRPC. But there also please mind you the words the magistrate may in his discretion. The magistrate need not necessarily convict him on his plea of guilty. It is something like see the fundamental principle discernible from Section 58 of the Evidence Act is that an admitted fact need not be proved. When the accused himself admitting that he has committed the guilt, he has committed the offense before the magistrate himself, then it need not be proved. If the magistrate is convinced that he has committed the offense, the magistrate can straight away convict him, find him guilty and impose his sentence. But that is not a must. Supposing the magistrate still feels that some other influence might be there, he is not voluntarily, he is on free will pleading guilty. When the magistrate not understanding the plea of guilt made by the accused, the magistrate can ask the prosecution to prove his case. That is why in his discretion 252 says magistrate may in his discretion. Then the yet another situation where accused is absent, where accused is absent before the magistrate. The accused pleads guilty in absentia in petty cases where special summons under Section 206 once he is busy has been issued. The accused shall transmit to the magistrate by post or by messenger a letter containing his plea and also amount, the amount of fine specified in the summons. That is Section 253 clause 1. Section 253 clause 1 entitles, enables the accused to plead guilty in absence, in his absence. He can plead guilty either by post or by a messenger and transmit to the magistrate by post or messenger the amount specified in the special summons. The special summons issued to him would have shown the fine amount and it would also indicate that if you are willing to plead guilty, you need not appear before me. You can remit the fine amount shown in this summons by post or through messenger. That is the provision under Section 253 once he are busy. This is the procedure available to the accused and what should the magistrate do? The magistrate may in his discretion convict the accused in his absence on his plea of guilt and sentenced him to pay the fine specified in the summons already issued to the accused. And the amount transmitted by the accused shall be adjusted toward the fine in the alternative where the accused had engaged a counsel and where the counsel authorized by the accused plead guilty on his behalf. The same shall be recorded in the words of the counsel himself and the magistrate may in his discretion convict the accused on such plea and sentenced him to fine as a force. So, the magistrate may in his discretion convict the accused in his absence on his plea of guilt and straight away sentenced him to fine or imprisonment whatever it be, not exceeding 3 months. But here there is no imprisonment. Here there is a fine specified in the special summons. So, it should not exceed 1000 rupees also. The magistrate can set off that amount from the amount already dispatched through post or through messenger. And if it is through the counsel, the accused had engaged a counsel to plead guilty. The counsel can plead guilty in his own words which shall be recorded by the magistrate and the magistrate can take from the counsel the fine amount indicated in the special summons. This is the procedure. Then the usual trial proper. Trial proper means these are these trial in absentia that is convicting the accused in his absence does not involve trial because he is pleading guilty. Now, we take the other situation. I told you that magistrate can even where the accused pleads guilty, magistrate can refrain from convicting him because he has got the discretion not to convict him also. So, in those cases the magistrate does not convict him even on his plea of guilt or in those cases where the accused pleads not guilty. I am not guilty. I have not committed these over. This is the standard. In those cases there should be a trial. If the magistrate does not convict the accused who is present on his pleading guilty under section 252 CRPC or on his pleading guilty in his absence under section 253 CRPC. Or under section 251 on his pleading guilty in presents while he is present. Then the magistrate shall hear the prosecution and take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution. So, in those cases where the accused while present before the magistrate pleads not guilty or even when he is pleading guilty but the magistrate does not convict him or the magistrate in the absence of the accused does not convict the accused who has pleaded guilty. In those cases the magistrate shall call upon the prosecution to abuse all its evidence in support of the allegation. This is section 254 on CRPC. The magistrate in a summary trial need record only the substance of the evidence. The magistrate need record only the substance of the evidence not the entire evidence in the form of narrative. The magistrate need only record the substance of the evidence as indicated by section 264 CRPC. In a prosecution under section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act interpreting section 145 of the Negotiable Instruments Act the Supreme Court has ruled that chief examination of all the witnesses not only the complainant all the witnesses can be in the form of affidavits so that the witnesses need not come before court and do their chief examination. It can be in the form of affidavits and those witnesses need be summoned only if a request for their cross-examination is made. They need come before the court only if there is a request to cross-examine them otherwise their chief examination will be in the form of an affidavit examination in chief. We generally call it proof affidavit. The citation is Indian Bank Association versus Union Bank of India 2014 Volume 5 SEC 590. Judges are K. S. P. Radagrishnan is the author of the judgment and Vikram Ajit Sen. K. S. P. Radagrishnan and Vikram Ajit Sen are the judges. Once the prosecution evidence is over there is a procedure called section 313 examination. That is, this is a part of the principle of audio-alterm partner. No person shall be condemned and heard as a rule of natural justice. So section 313 1B CRPC incorporates the principle of natural justice that if the personal attendance of the accused was not dispensed with during trial, there are cases where the accused can be, the appearance of the accused can be dispensed with during trial. Except those cases, in all cases where the accused have been present during trial, he has to be heard on the incriminating circumstances in the evidence for the prosecution. Those circumstances which point an accusing finger at the accused, those circumstances in the evidence for the prosecution will have to be put to the accused one by one. See, this particular document shows that you executed this promissory note or this particular witness PW1 has deposed that you are the person who drew the check-in question or promissory note in question. All these are against the accused. So all the each circumstance should be put to the accused because he should be given an opportunity to explain. He may have so many explanations. So he should be given an opportunity to explain. In fact, Supreme Court has gone to the extent of saying that if any particular incriminating circumstance against the accused has not been put to him, that circumstance shall not be used for entering a conviction against him. A particular incriminating circumstance, if it was not put to the accused, then that particular circumstance should not be made use of for convicting the accused, finding him guilty. That is section 313 examinations. After section 313 examination, there is the defense evidence. Unlike warrant trial, that is warrant trial by magistrate and warrant trial by session judge, unlike warrant trial, the accused will not be called upon by the court to enter on his defense. Whereas in warrant trial, the court will call upon the accused to enter on his defense. You may enter on your defense. You can examine witnesses, you can produce documents, you can seek summons for the appearance of any witness on your behalf. All these rights are there and the court will have to call upon the accused to enter on his defense. Whereas such a procedure is not there in summons trial and particularly summary trial also. Summon summary trial is only after summons trial. So, defense trial is after the prosecution evidence is over and 313 examination is concluded. The accused will have to come forward, say that I got defense evidence. He cannot rest on his oath to say I will be called upon. I can wait here. The court will call upon me to produce defense evidence. No, there is no such procedure in summons trial and summary trial. So, the accused will have to offer, voluntarily offer that I got defense evidence. I may be permitted to produce defense evidence. Then the court will permit him. That is also under section 254 clause 1 of CRPC. He will not be called upon to enter on his defense. Here also only the substance of the evidence need be recorded by the court in view of section 264 CRPC because it is summary trial. Substance of evidence. Evidence need not be in a narrative. It should not be a long drawn out process. The substance of the evidence can be recorded by the magistrate. Next stage is arguments. Section 314 CRPC. As soon as the evidence is closed, parties should address the court in the form of concise oral arguments before the conclusion of which they may submit a written memorandum setting forth the arguments in support of their case in a proper order. It is not a written argument. It is not a necessary. But if they so choose, they can submit a written argument also. But towards the close of the oral arguments, it will not be given further time. The court will not give any further time to submit written arguments. Then comes the judgment. In every case, tried summarily in which the accused does not plead guilty, a judgment containing a brief statement of the reasons for the finding shall be written in the language of the court. This is what section 264 CRPC insists. Then in the case of accused who is sentenced to imprisonment, it shall not be for a term exceeding 3 months. I have already stated that by virtue of the application of section 262 subsection 2. 262 says imprisonment shall not exceed 3 months because that is the outer limit for summary trial. Now unlike warrant trial, no hearing on the proposed sentence after finding the accused guilty, after convicting the accused, he will not be heard on the proposed sentence. Whereas in warrant trial, the court will have to hear the accused regarding the sentence to be proposed. What do you say about the sentence to be proposed on you? What all circumstances are there for you to mitigate the sentence? All those things he can adduce. But here there is no such thing. Because after all sentence is only 3 months or fine only. Therefore there is no question of hearing the accused on the proposed sentence. It is a flea bite sentence. So no hearing on the proposed sentence. With that the case is over. But then there are certain obligations for the magistrate. Record in summary trials. After the summary trial, section 263 CRPC insists that the magistrate shall make a record in the prescribed form, the following particulars in the language of the court. Section 263 CRPC reads as follows. In every case tried to summary the magistrate shall enter in such form as the state government may direct. The following particulars that summary record of say recording summary trial is a must in every trial. Immediately after the summary trial, the magistrate has to keep this following record in the form prescribed by the state government. A. The serial number of the case. B. The date of the commission of the offence. C. The date of the report of complaint. When was the complaint made? When was the offence reported? D. The name of the complaint and if any, whether the complainant was named. Named to complainant was there. The name and parentage of the residence of the accused. Name, parentage and residence of the accused. F. The offence complained of and the offence if any proved. And in cases coming under clauses 2, 3, 4 and 4 of subsection 1 of section 260 that is the stolen property. We have mentioned about stolen property, receiving stolen property, retaining stolen property, unhaving the stolen property to be disposed of. All those offences we mentioned, those offences, whether the value of the property in respect of which has been committed. The value will have to be mentioned because if the value is above 2,000, then it cannot be tried as a summary trial. Then G. The plea of the accused and his examination if any, whether the accused had pleaded guilty or not guilty. Whether he was examining, examined because if there is, he need be examined only if there is incriminating circumstance against him. Supposing there is no incriminating circumstance, he need not be examined under section 313 CRP. Then the finding of the court, H is the finding of the court. Then I, the sentence or the other final order which has been passed by the court. Then the date on which the proceedings were terminated. That is the last entry to be made, date on which the proceedings were terminated. So the judgment and lastly the judgment and record as mentioned above to be in the language of the court. The judgment under section 264 CRPZ as well as the record under section 263 CRPZ in summary trial shall be written in the language of the court as determined by the state government under section 265, read with section 272 CRPZ. Under section 272 CRPZ, the state government has got the power to decide the language of the court other than the high court. Lower courts, subordinate courts, state government has got the power to determine the language of the court. Supposing the language of the court as fixed by the state government is English, the whole president can be in English. Supposing it is in Hindi, the whole president can be in Hindi. In Kerala supposing it is in Malayalam, the president can be in Malayalam, vernacular language. All depends on the notification issued by the state government under section 272 CRPZ, 272 CRPZ. With that we, then we come to the end of question number three. We have to now come to the last question. Question number four, is there any limit on the sentence of imprisonment to be passed for summary trials under chapter 21 CRPZ? Yes, I have already stated that section 262 CRPZ, 262 subsection 2 CRPZ, enjoined that no sentence of imprisonment for a term exceeding three months shall be passed on a conviction under section under chapter 21 CRPZ. That is the outer limit of imprisonment which can be passed by a court conducting, by a magistrate conducting summary trial. Therefore that is the, it should not exceed imprisonment for three months. With that we come to the close of the summary trial. Summary trial, because of the procedural triangle, there is a lot of confusion exists among the some members of the bench and the bar. I hope this short webinar will clear all those doubts. Thank you. Thank you sir. I am just seeing there were a lot of questions, somehow they are not coming up. Thank you because I was just checking it out, there were a few questions somehow in the YouTube. It should be confined to summary trial. No, they were only on this thing only, on the summary trial. Not all covered, all covered now. That's true. Thank you sir for sharing your knowledge and the way the people have received it on the YouTube, I am saying that it will do very well. Thank you.