Chapter XXVI
Section 350 CrPC: Summary procedure for punishment for non-attendance by a witness in obedience to summons
New Law Update (2024)
Section 480 BNSS
TRIAL COURT
Any Criminal Court
Punishment
Procedural – Warrant / Summons Process
Cognizable?
Bailable?
Compoundable?
Bare Act Text
(1) If any witness, having been summoned to appear before a Criminal Court and being legally bound to appear at a certain place and time in obedience to such summons, without just excuse neglects or refuses to attend at that place or time, or departs from the place where he has to attend before the time at which it is lawful for him to depart, and the Court before which the witness is to appear is satisfied that it is expedient in the interests of justice that such a witness should be tried summarily, the Court may take cognizance of the offence and, after giving the offender an opportunity of showing cause why he should not be punished under this section, sentence him to a fine not exceeding one hundred rupees.
(2) In every such case, the Court shall follow, as nearly as may be practicable, the procedure prescribed for summary trials.
Important Sub-Sections Explained
Section 350(1)
This sub-section outlines when a court can punish a witness for not showing up or leaving early without a valid reason. The court must deem it necessary for justice and will always give the witness a chance to explain why they should not be fined up to one hundred rupees.
Section 350(2)
This sub-section mandates that the court must follow the established rules for “summary trials” as closely as possible when dealing with such a defaulting witness. This ensures that the process is fair and proper, even for minor penalties.
Landmark Judgements
Jagdish Lal v. State of Haryana (1990):
This case emphasized that the power under Section 350 CrPC should be exercised with caution and only when the court is satisfied that it is expedient in the interests of justice. It also underscored the mandatory requirement of giving the defaulting witness an opportunity to show cause against the proposed punishment, upholding principles of natural justice.
Manish Kumar v. State of U.P. (2007):
This judgment reiterated the importance of strictly adhering to the summary trial procedure prescribed under Section 350(2) CrPC. It emphasized that failure to follow the detailed procedure, including proper recording of evidence and giving a full opportunity to the accused (witness) to defend themselves, would vitiate the summary proceedings.