Is it necessary for the High Court to assign reasons while summarily dismissing an appeal under Section 384, CrPC? Refer to the relevant case laws on the point.

Question: Is it necessary for the High Court to assign reasons while summarily dismissing an appeal under Section 384, CrPC? Refer to the relevant case laws on the point.

Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [Is it necessary for the High Court to assign reasons while summarily dismissing an appeal under Section 384, CrPC? Refer to the relevant case laws on the point.]

Answer

Summary Dismissal of appeal indicates dismissing the appeal in an informal way and without any procrastination of the formal proceedings. Section 384 of CrPC talks about the Summary dismissal of the appeal and states that:

“(1) If upon examining the petition of appeal and copy of the judgment received under section 382 or section 383, the Appellate Court considers that there is no sufficient ground for interfering, it may dismiss the appeal summarily;

(2) Before dismissing an appeal under this section, the Court may call for the record of the case.

(3) Where the Appellate Court dismissing an appeal under this section is a Court of Session or of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, it shall record its reasons for doing so.”

The provision only makes it mandatory for the Court of Session or Chief Judicial Magistrate to record its reasons before dismissing an appeal as an appellate court. This implies that the section doesn’t expressly make it necessary for the High Court to assign reasons while summarily dismissing an appeal under Section 384 of the code.

However, in Dandiba v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1976 SC 1151, SC observed that a person can file a petition of special leave to SC when aggrieved by the orders of the High Court, so it is essential that High Court should give some reasons why no arguable case was made out on a perusal of the documents and should dismiss the appeal by just one word “dismissed”.

The High Court, as an appellate Court, can summarily dismiss an appeal if it considers that there is no ground for interfering. In Manumiya v. State of Gujarat, AIR 1979 SC 1706, when there was a clear finding of the Trial Court as to interference by the accused with the discharge of his duty by the public servant, the High Court was held to be justified in dismissing the appeal by the accused in limine.

But on the other hand, sub-section (3) makes it obligatory for the Court of Session or the Court of the Chief Judicial Magistrate to record its reasons for dismissing an appeal summarily. This is with a view to assisting the High Court in deciding whether a summary dismissal was justified.

---

Important Mains/Long Questions for Judiciary, APO & University Exams

1. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part I: Important Questions
2. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part II: Important Questions
3. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part III: Important Questions
4. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part IV: Important Questions
5. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part V: Important Questions
6. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VI: Important Questions
7. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VII: Important Questions
8. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part VIII: Important Questions
9. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part IX: Important Questions
10. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part X: Important Questions
11. CRPC Mains Questions Series Part XI: Important Questions