[Sections 260 To 264, Cr.P.C.]
Summary trial is undesirable. Where a complicated question of right and title and production of documentary evidence involved. 21 Cr. LJ 374 Bhim Bahadar. 13 Cr. LJ 71 Tirith Das. When as a consequence dismissal of Government Servant is involved 6 Mad. 396 Subramanya Ayyar. Where the accused was bound down under Section 109 and conviction would entail forfeiture of bond. 30 Cr. LJ 505 Bashir.
Summary trial whether desirable. Summary trial of a Government Servant whether desirable depends on the facts of each case. AIR 1932 Lah. 188 RJ Bradley v. Emp. not followed. AIR 1939 Lah. 467 rel. (DB) PLD 1959 Kar. 213 Abdul Najib.
Examination and plea of accused. The accused can either be convicted on his own plea without the taking of evidence or acquitted on the evidence without the examination under Section 342, Cr. P.C. (FB) 26 Cr. LJ 1554 Nabu.
Statement of the accused to be fully recorded by the Magistrate so that if a question should arise as to whether the accused did or did not plead mitigating circumstances, the question could be answered by a reference to the record. AIR 1946 Sindh 67 Emp. v. Tiloomal.
Failure to record the statement or examinations not fatal where the Magistrate considered the statements of the accused. 41 Cr. LJ 531 Khan Muhammad.
Compliance with Section 342, Cr. P.C. is not dispensed with in summary trials, after the case for the prosecution is closed. 39 Cr. LJ 474 Choithram v. Emperor.
Examination of accused. The provision of Section 342 , Cr. P.C. apply to summons cases and summary trial and non-compliance vitiates trial, but when accused pleads guilty under Section 243, Cr. P.C. the examination under Section 342, Cr. P.C. is not necessary, but the admission of guilt should be recorded in the words of the accused as nearly as possible. Retrial ordered. ILR 15 Lah. 60 Karam Din v. Crown: ILR 15 Lah. 277 Abdur Rehman v. Crown.
Plea of accused to be put as nearly as may be in his own words. The statutory provision to record accused's admission as nearly as may be in accused's own words is designed to enable trial Court and superior Courts to know that the accused understood that he was really pleading guilty of offence charged when plea of accused not recorded and no prosecution allegations put to him, conviction was set aside. 1971 P.Cr. LJ 658 Dr. Ghulam Mustafa.
Offence. The facts found by the Magistrate must show what offence committed by the accused. 1887 PR 7 Mahtab. 1889 PR 5 Sher Singh. 29 Cr. LJ 877 Din Muhammad.
Record. Although the object of summary procedure is to shorten the course of trial, it is nonetheless incumbent on the Magistrate to put on record sufficient evidence to justify his order. 27 Cal. 450 Ain-ud-Din. If the particulars required by Section 263 are not clearly given in a Judgment in a summary trial convicting the accused, the Judgment is defective and the conviction cannot stand. 23 Cr.LJ 161 Ghulam.
Evidence need not be recorded in a summary trial but it must be heard when produced. 39 Cal. 931 Jabbar v. Tamiz. 39 Cr. LJ 474 Choitram. No separate memorandum of evidence is needed to be recorded. The memo of the evidence of the witnesses should be embodied in the Judgement 48 Cr.LJ 477 King Emp v. Seva Sigh.
Jurisdiction-value. Where the value prescribed under Section 260 (1) (e), Cr.P.C. exceeds, summary trial is altogether illegal. PLD 1956 Kar. 359 Asghar Ali.
Judgment. Full reasons not necessary. When the Magistrate is satisfied that the offence has bee proved specifying the ingredients of the offence is not necessary. PLD 1959 Kar. 150 State v. A. Sattar.
Failure to record reasons for conviction, is fatal and the proceedings are illegal and liable to be set aside. 6 Cal. 579 Punjab Singh. 29 Cr.LJ 265 Murat Singh.
Reasons for conviction should present a clear statement of facts constituting the offence and all the ingredients have bee proved. AIR 1935 Sindh 144 Dayaram. AIR 1948 Sindh 59 Emp v. Hansraj Din Dayal.