Trials by Session
Trials by Session
Introduction
Scope of the topic
Initial steps in the trial
o Opening case for prosecution
o Discharge
o Framing of charge
o Explaining the charge to the accused
o Conviction on plea of guilty
o Date for prosecution evidence
Evidence for prosecution
o Examination of witnesses
o Record of the evidence
Steps to follow the prosecution evidence
o Oral arguments and memorandum of arguments on behalf of the
prosecution
o Explanation of the accused
o Hearing the parties
o Order of the acquittal
Steps to follow the defence evidence
o Court witnesses, if any
o Arguments
Judgment and connected matters
o Judgment
o Procedure to follow the order of conviction
o Procedure in case of previous conviction
Procedures in cases of defamation of high dignitaries and public servants
Conclusion
Introduction
In India, we follow the adversarial system. It implies that the Judge acts as a
neutral party and hears the prosecution and defence on the point of law
without actually taking part in the proceeding. Under the Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973 every individual has a right to fair trial and hearing by an
independent and unbiased tribunal. Section 303 confers a right upon the
accused to be defended by a lawyer of his choice. Under Section 304 where
an accused person is unable to represent his case by a pleader, the Court
shall appoint a pleader for him at the state’s expense. The accused is
presumed to be innocent until proven guilty of the charges against him.
Moreover, the accused has a right to cross-examine the witnesses of the
prosecution. All offences under the Indian Penal Code, 1860 are inquired,
investigated and tried according to the provisions of Criminal Procedure
Code, 1973 except otherwise provided. The Code describes the procedure for
the trial of a criminal case and its stages. In India, there is a uniform judicial
system at the apex position being the Supreme Court, the High Court has the
power of superintendence over all the courts and tribunal within the state.
The CrPC divides criminal trial into sessions trial and magistrate trial.
Whether an offence is triable by a Court of Session or Magistrate’s Court is
specified under the First Schedule of the Code. When a District Court
exercises its jurisdiction over criminal matters it is referred as a Court of
Session. A Court of Session is considered as a court of first instance which
deals with offences which are of a serious nature at a district level. It is the
highest criminal court in a district. According to Section 9 of the CrPC, the
State Government is empowered to establish a Court for every sessions
division and every Court of Session is presided over by a Judge appointed by
the High Court.
Under Section 207 and Section 208 the Magistrate is required to supply
copies of documents like First Information Report, the statement recorded by
the police or Magistrate, etc to the accused. Under Section 209, if it appears
to the magistrate that the offence is triable exclusively by the Court of
Session, he may commit the case to the Court of Session and send all the
documents and records to it and either grant bail or remand the accused into
custody and shall also notify the Public Prosecutor. The procedure for trial
before a Court of Session is mentioned from Section 225 to Section 237. As
per Section 225, every trial before a Court of Session is conducted by a
Public Prosecutor.
Discharge
The Court, on considering the documents and records of the case, and
hearing the prosecution and the accused on the matter, shall discharge the
accused if the Judge thinks that there is no sufficient ground to proceed
against the accused. The Judge is required to record his reasons for
discharging the accused under Section 227. It was held in State of Karnataka
v. L. Muniswamy that the object of this Section is to require the Judge to
give reasons for discharging the accused is to enable the superior court to
examine the correctness of the reasons for which the Sessions Judge has
held that there is or is not sufficient ground or not to proceed against the
accused.
Framing of charge
Under Section 228, The Judge after considering the records of the case and
the documents submitted along with it in evidence and hearing the
prosecution and the defence, he thinks that there is a ground to presume
that the accused has committed the offence and is exclusively triable by the
Court of Session, he will frame a charge against the accused.
If the case is not exclusively triable by the Court of Session then the Judge
may frame a charge against the accused and by order, transfer the case to
the Chief Judicial Magistrate or any other Judicial Magistrate of First Class.
He shall direct the accused to the Judicial Magistrate to whom the case has
been transferred. The Magistrate shall then try the case in accordance with
the procedure laid down for the trial of the warrant-cases instituted upon a
police report.
If two views are possible regarding the guilt of the accused, then the one
which is more favourable to the accused has to be taken.
It was held in Knati Bhadra Shah & anr v. State of West Bengal while
exercising power under Section 228 CrPC, the Judge is not required to record
his reasons for framing the charges against the accused.
While framing charges, only the prima facie case has to be seen. At this
stage, the Judge is not required to record a detailed order necessary to see
whether the case is beyond reasonable doubt as held by the Supreme Court
in Bhawna Bai v. Ghanshyam & Ors.
In Rukmini Narvekar v. Vijaya Satardekar it was ruled by the Court that the
accused cannot produce any evidence at the stage of framing of charge and
only those materials can be taken into consideration which is specified in
Section 227 at the time of framing charges.
Examination of witnesses
When the date is so fixed (as mentioned under Section 230), The Judge will
proceed to take all the evidence that may be produced by the prosecution in
his support as per Section 231. The Judge has the discretion to permit cross-
examination of any witness to be deferred until the other witness or
witnesses have been examined or recall any witness for further cross-
examination.
Section 137 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (‘IEA’) states that the
examination of a witness shall be done by the party who calls him
(prosecution) and it shall be called examination-in-chief. The cross-
examination of the witness is done by the adverse party (defence). The re-
examination is done subsequent to cross-examination by the prosecution
Section 138 of the IEA, 1872 lays down the order of examination of the
witnesses. It says that the witness should be first examined in chief and then
cross-examined. The examination in chief is done by the party who calls the
witness and cross-examination is done by the adverse party. If the party who
called the witness so desires, can re-examine the witness with the
permission of the Court.
It has been provided under Section 278(1) that when the evidence of each
witness is complete, it shall be read over in the presence of the accused or in
his absence in the presence of his pleader and shall if necessary be
corrected. Also, as per Section 279 If any evidence is given in a language
that the accused or his lawyer does not understand, it shall be interpreted to
the accused or his lawyer in the language understood by him.
Arguments
Under Section 234, the prosecution shall sum up his case and the accused or
his pleader shall be entitled to reply, and if any point of law is raised by the
accused or his pleader, the prosecution may with due permission of the
Judge make his submission with regard to point of law. It is to be noted
that Section 314 also talks about the arguments of the parties. However,
Section 234 provides that after the evidence for the defence is concluded it is
for the prosecution to sum up the case, and then the defence will be entitled
to reply. Section 234 is a special one regarding argument whereas Section
314 is a general provision and therefore Section 234 would prevail over
Section 314. The reason being it is a well-settled law that when there is any
inconsistency between a general and a special law, the special one would
prevail.
Judgment
As per Section 235, a Judge will pronounce a judgement of acquittal or
conviction after hearing the arguments of both the parties i.e, the
prosecution and defence and on point of law (if any). However, considering
the character of the offender, the circumstances of the case and the nature
of the offence, the Judge may as per Section 360 decide to release the
offender on probation of good conduct. If the accused is acquitted, the
acquittal will be done according to the procedure laid down under Section
232 and if he is convicted he shall be dealt according to Section 235.
On this point, the Apex Court in Santa Singh v. State of Punjab held that the
Judge should first pass a sentence of conviction or acquittal. If the accused is
convicted he shall be heard on the question of sentence and only then the
Court shall proceed to pass a sentence against him.
In Bacchan Singh v. State of Punjab, it was ruled by the Court that this
Section provides for a bifurcated trial and specifically gives to the accused
person a right of pre-sentence hearing which may not be strictly relevant to
or connected with the particular crime under inquiry but may have a bearing
on the choice of the sentence.
Section 237 requires the Court of Sessions to try the case in accordance with
the procedure for trial of warrant-cases instituted otherwise than on a police
report before a Magistrate Court when it takes cognizance of an offence
under Section 199 (2).
Each trial under Section 237 is to be conducted in camera if the Court thinks
or if either of the party so desires. If the Court discharges or acquits all or
any of the accused and the Court thinks that there is no reasonable cause of
making an accusation against the accused or any of them. A show-cause
notice for grant of compensation may be issued to those allegedly defamed.
Conclusion
The above article outlines all the procedures relating to the sessions trial.
The Code of Criminal Procedure provides an opportunity for the accused for
fair trial and makes an effort to avoid any delay in investigation or trial. The
Judge in every case ensures that the accused is given a fair opportunity of
hearing and defending his case. The Code also provides for legal aid to an
indigent accused who is unable to engage a lawyer in compliance with the
constitutional requirements and also as required by Section 304 so that any
person accused of committing an offence is not wrongly convicted and justice
is served.