In a trial of summons case, the accused A pleads guilty to the magistrate. The Magistrate records the plea of guilt but does not record it immediately, but later on the basis of his memory. After recording a `plea of guilt’, the Magistrate convicts A. Is the conviction of A valid?

Question: In a trial of summons case, the accused A pleads guilty to the magistrate. The Magistrate records the plea of guilt but does not record it immediately, but later on the basis of his memory. After recording a 'plea of guilt’, the Magistrate convicts A. Is the conviction of A valid? Give reasons and also refer to the case law on the point.

Find the answer only on Legal Bites. [In a trial of summons case, the accused A pleads guilty to the magistrate. The Magistrate records the plea of guilt but does not record it immediately, but later on the basis of his memory. After recording a 'plea of guilt’, the Magistrate convicts A. Is the conviction of A valid?]

Answer

In a summons case, the accused after he appears will be told the particulars of the offence of which he is charged and will be asked if he has any cause to show why he should not be convicted (Section 242), and if he admits that he has committed the offence, his admission must be recorded as nearly as possible in the words used by him, and the Magistrate may convict him on his admission (Section 243)

In Section 251 of CrPC, it is stated that no formal charge needs to be framed in a summons case. So, stating to the accused the accusation against him in a summons case under Section 251 of CrPC becomes very important. It is giving an opportunity to the accused to meet the case/accusation as against him, as already stated, it is also a matter of principles of natural justice. It is also in furtherance of the rights of the accused.

When the accused admit the offence under Sections 251 of CrPC, and under Section 252 of CrPC, the Judge can accept it provided it is unqualified, unambiguous, clear cut and voluntary, otherwise, he can refuse to accept the plea, he can direct the prosecution to produce the witness because as and when an accused admit the offence under Section 251 of CrPC, it is not incumbent upon the Judge to immediately accept the plea. Such discretion has been given to the trial Court under Section 252 of CrPC.

One thing is clear, a reading of the provisions of Section 251 of CrPC, makes it clear that the trial Judge must clearly put to the accused what the accusation is against him, what penal provision of law he has violated, what are the reasons therefore and it gives an opportunity to the accused to put forth his defence, so as to enable the trial court to appreciate the same and to appreciate his defence in the light of the evidence adduced by the prosecution. A reading of Section 251 of CrPC, will clearly show that the requirement in Section 251 of CrPC, is mandatory in nature.

Not following him will make the very prosecution vitiated.

In the summons case, such a strict following of the mandatory provisions of Law which are intended to protect a person, who has been prosecuted for a summons offence becomes very important, because as per Section 375 of CrPC, no appeal will lie against conviction recorded based on the plea of the accused.

But, notwithstanding the provisions of Section 375 of CrPC, if a conviction recorded and sentence awarded based on the plea of guilty made by the accused is not in accordance with Law and it is in violation of settled principles of Law and the mandatory provisions of law. Then, it is legality, proprietary, and regulatory and can be questioned under the concurrent revisional jurisdiction of this Court and the High Court under Sections 397 r/w. 401 of CrPC.

In a case before Hon’ble Madras HC in P.Saravanan v. State Represented By on 13 July 2016, a similar situation as the facts of the present case in hand arose. In the case, the court recorded that

There is nothing in the trial court records to show that the plea of the accused has been recorded as nearly as possible in the words of the accused, of course in column No.11 of the STC register, what was stated in Vernacular Language does not show that Section 251 of CrPC has been complied with. In other words, column No.11 of the S.T.C. Register does not reveal that the details of the accusation have been made against the accused has been put to the accused and the plea of the accused given by him, in his words as nearly as possible has been recorded.

In such circumstances, it shall be deemed that the accused has not at all been put to the accused it could be stated that the accused has not been explained to the accusation as against him and his plea has been recorded as nearly as possible in the words of the accused. Therefore, the provisions under Section 251 of CrPC have been completely violated. Consequently, the conviction recorded under Section 252 of CrPC, which has to follow the plea recorded under Section 252 of CrPC itself is vitiated.

Thus, applying the aforesaid principle and reasoning to the present proposition, it is clear that the mandatory provision of section 251 of CrPC has not been complied with to convict the accused. Thus, the conviction is illegal and stands vitiated.

---

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