9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 1395X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the Sessions Judge. The Sessions Judge, by the impugned order dated 20th October 2015, set aside the judgment of the learned Magistrate and remitted back the proceedings mainly on the ground that the accused did not get a chance to argue the matter before the learned Magistrate at the time of final arguments as well as the point of the sentence. 4. The petitioner takes exception to the said judgment in the present writ petition. The learned advocate for the petitioner submitted that the impugned judgment is in ignorance of Section 353(7) and (8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure. According to him, the accused's appearance on earlier dates and his conduct constrained the Magistrate to pronounce judgment on the scheduled date. Despite several opportunities granted to the accused, he chose not to remain present during arguments and on the date of judgment. In the absence of any party to the trial, the Magistrate is not powerless to pronounce the judgment in view of Sub-section (7) of Section 353 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Therefore, the Appellate Court was not justified in remitting the matter back to the learned Magistrate. 5. Per contra, the learned advocate for re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rate pronounced the judgment in open Court. 8. At this stage, it is necessary to consider relevant provisions of the Act, which are as under. "Section 353. Judgment - (1) The judgment in every trial in any Criminal Court of original jurisdiction shall be pronounced in open Court by the presiding officer immediately after the termination of the trial or at some subsequent time of which notice shall be given to the parties or their pleaders: (i) By delivering out the whole of the judgment; or (ii) By reading out the whole of the judgment; or (iii) By reading out the operative part of the judgment and explaining the substance of the judgment in a language which is understood by the accused or his pleader. (2) Where the judgment is delivered under clause (a) of subsection (1), the presiding officer shall cause it to be taken down in short-hand, sign the transcript and every page thereof as soon as it is made ready, and write on it the date of delivery of the judgment in open Court. (3) Where the judgment or the operative part thereof is read out under clause (b) or clause (c) of sub-section (1), as the case may be, it shall be dated and signed by the presiding officer i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have been raised at an earlier stage in the proceedings." 9. Careful reading of Section 353 of Code of Criminal Procedure makes it clear that the provision contained in Chapter XXVII of Code of Criminal Procedure prescribes the procedure to be followed by the Trial Courts at the time of delivery of judgment. In the facts of the case, I am not concerned with Sub-section 1 to 5. Sub-section 6 deals with the contingency where the accused is not in custody; it mandates that the Court calls upon the accused to attend a hearing when the judgment is being pronounced. However, the proviso to said sub-section creates an exception to the said provisions, which dispenses with the presence of the accused in a situation where there is more than one accused and to prevent undue delay in the disposal of the case. Accordingly, the Trial Court is permitted to pronounce the judgment notwithstanding the absence of the accused. 10. Sub-section 7 of Section 353 protects the Trial Court's acts to pronounce a judgment in the absence of any party or pleader. Sub-section (7), in clear terms, states that the judgment delivered by the Criminal Court in the absence of a party shall not be invalid by rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ied are also relevant factors while interpreting Sub-section (7) (8) of Section 353 and Section 465. With the introduction of Sections 143 A and 148 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881, the legislature has made it clear that the trial in the cases of dishonour of cheques is to ensure that the faith of ordinary citizens dealing with Negotiable Instruments is strengthened. The endeavour of the legislature, while amending the provisions of the Negotiable Instruments Act, is to ensure expeditious disposal of a complaint involving dishonour of cheque. Introduction to Section 143(a), 148 is one of such steps taken by the legislature to ensure that the proceedings under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881, are tried expeditiously and effectively. While interpreting Section 353(7)(8) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the Court cannot forget that it deals with complaints under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act 1881. 14. The Apex Court, in the case of K.S. Panduranga Vs. State of Karnataka reported in (2013) 3 SCC 721 was considering a case where the High Court decided the appeal arising out of conviction under the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1947 on merits in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
