A Summons Trial and a Summary Trial | BNSS 2023

A Summons Trial and a Summary Trial Compared: the Same Procedure Abbreviated, the Three-Month Cap, and Why the Record Carries the Whole Weight

A summary trial is not a different procedure. Section 285 provides that in trials under that Chapter the procedure specified for the trial of a summons case shall be followed, except as the Chapter provides — so it is summons procedure, abbreviated.

What the Chapter takes away is the full record of the evidence. What it puts in its place is a cap of three months on the sentence. The two go together: a procedure which dispenses with a full record is defensible only where what is at stake is small, and the cap is what keeps that true.

1. The Two Compared

Figure 1: A summons trial and a summary trial

The procedure. In a summons trial the particulars of the offence are stated, no formal charge is framed, evidence is taken for prosecution and defence, and judgment follows. In a summary trial the same procedure applies except as Chapter XXII provides.
Which court. A summons trial by any Magistrate competent to try the case. A summary trial by a Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Magistrate of the first class; a Magistrate of the second class only if specially empowered.
Which offences. A summons trial for any offence not being a warrant case. A summary trial for those section 283 specifies — among them theft where the value does not exceed the stated sum, and other petty offences; and the Sanhita has widened its reach.
The record. In a summons trial the evidence is recorded in the ordinary way. In a summary trial section 286 requires only the particulars it specifies — the serial number, the date, the name of the accused, the offence, the plea, the finding and the sentence.
The judgment. A summons trial ends in a judgment under section 392, with the points for determination, the decision and the reasons. A summary trial ends in a judgment under section 287 recording the substance of the evidence and a brief statement of the reasons for the finding.
And the sentence. In a summary trial no sentence of imprisonment exceeding three months may be passed.

2. The Plea of Guilty, and the Record

Figure 2: Why the record carries the whole weight

📖 Kasambhai Abdulrehmanbhai Sheikh v. State of Gujarat, (1980) 3 SCC 120

Facts: An accused was convicted on a plea of guilty recorded in a summary trial, the record noting only that he had pleaded guilty, without setting out the words in which he did so or anything to show what he understood himself to be admitting.

Held: The Supreme Court held that where an accused pleads guilty, the Magistrate is required to record the plea as nearly as possible in the words used by the accused, and that a record which merely states that he pleaded guilty is not a compliance with that requirement. The Court held that the requirement exists so that a court examining the conviction afterwards can see what the accused actually admitted — and that where the words are not recorded, there is nothing by which to judge whether what he said amounted to an admission of the ingredients of the offence at all. It held that a plea must be clear and unambiguous and must admit the offence charged; that a Magistrate should be slow to convict on a plea where the accused is unrepresented or appears not to have understood the accusation; and that the word in the provision is may, so that even on a valid plea the Magistrate retains a discretion to decline to act on it and to try the case.

Ratio: A plea of guilty must be recorded as nearly as possible in the accused’s own words. A record stating only that he pleaded guilty is no compliance, since there is then nothing by which to judge whether he admitted the ingredients of the offence.

The accused’s own words must be recorded. A record which says only “pleads guilty” shows nothing about what he understood himself to be admitting.
And the plea must answer the accusation. A plea is not an admission of guilt unless it admits the ingredients of the offence. Where the words recorded are consistent with innocence, or admit only part of what is alleged, the Magistrate may not convict on the plea and must proceed to try the case.
The Magistrate retains a discretion. Even on a valid plea he may convict — the word is may. Where the offence is serious, where the accused is unrepresented, or where the plea appears to have been made without understanding, he should decline to act on it.
And in a summary trial the record is all there is. Because section 286 dispenses with a full record of the evidence, the particulars it does require carry the whole weight. Where those are not properly recorded, a court examining the conviction afterwards has nothing on which to satisfy itself that the trial was properly held.

⚠ Two further points

A summary trial may be converted. Where in the course of it the Magistrate finds the case undesirable to try summarily, he shall recall any witnesses who may have been examined and proceed to re-hear the case in the manner provided by the Sanhita.

The abbreviated record cuts both ways. It saves time in a petty case, but it also means that where the conviction is challenged, there is often very little on the record to support it — which is why the particulars required by section 286 must be completed with care rather than as a formality.

The requirement to record the plea in the accused’s own words is not peculiar to summary trials. It applies equally in a summons trial and in a warrant trial — but it matters most here, where there is frequently nothing else by which the conviction can be tested.

And the three-month cap is the safeguard that justifies the rest. A Magistrate who considers that a sentence exceeding three months may be called for should not try the case summarily at all.

3. Key Takeaways

The position stated shortly

1. A summary trial is summons procedure abbreviated. Section 285: the procedure for a summons case shall be followed except as the Chapter provides.

2. A summary trial may be held by a Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Magistrate of the first class; a Magistrate of the second class only if specially empowered.

3. It is available for the offences section 283 specifies, including theft where the value does not exceed the stated sum — and the Sanhita has widened its reach.

4. Section 286 requires only the particulars it specifies to be recorded — not the evidence in full.

5. Section 287: the judgment records the substance of the evidence and a brief statement of the reasons for the finding.

6. No sentence of imprisonment exceeding three months may be passed in a summary trial — the cap which justifies the abbreviated record.

7. A plea of guilty must be recorded as nearly as possible in the accused’s own words; a record stating only that he pleaded guilty is no compliance: Kasambhai.

8. A plea is not an admission unless it admits the ingredients of the offence, and the Magistrate retains a discretion to decline to act on it.

9. In a summary trial the record is all there is, and where the particulars are not properly recorded a court examining the conviction has nothing to go on.

10. And where the case proves undesirable to try summarily, the Magistrate shall recall the witnesses and re-hear it in the ordinary manner.

4. Frequently Asked Questions

Is a summary trial a different procedure?

No. Section 285 provides that the procedure for the trial of a summons case shall be followed, except as the Chapter provides. It is summons procedure, abbreviated — chiefly in the record it requires.

Who may try a case summarily?

A Chief Judicial Magistrate or a Magistrate of the first class; a Magistrate of the second class only if specially empowered by the High Court in that behalf.

What is the limit on sentence?

No sentence of imprisonment exceeding three months may be passed in a summary trial. A Magistrate who considers that a longer sentence may be called for should not try the case summarily at all.

What must be recorded?

Under section 286, the particulars that section specifies — the serial number, the date, the name of the accused, the offence, the plea, the finding and the sentence. The evidence is not recorded in full.

How must a plea of guilty be recorded?

As nearly as possible in the words used by the accused. A record stating only that he pleaded guilty is no compliance, since there is then nothing by which to judge whether he admitted the ingredients of the offence: Kasambhai Abdulrehmanbhai Sheikh v. State of Gujarat.

What if the case proves unsuitable for summary trial?

The Magistrate shall recall any witnesses who may have been examined and proceed to re-hear the case in the manner provided by the Sanhita — so that the accused is not prejudiced by the abbreviated procedure already followed.

Related Topics

Summary Trials: Sections 283 to 288, BNSS
Trial of Summons Cases by Magistrates: Sections 274 to 282
Summons Cases and Warrant Cases Compared
A Charge and the Substance of the Accusation Compared
Plea Bargaining under the BNSS, 2023: Sections 289 to 300
The Judgment: Sections 392 to 406, BNSS