Skip to main content

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUMMON CASE AND WARRANT CASE

 DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SUMMON CASE AND WARRANT CASE

 

OBJECTIVE

SUMMON CASE

WARRANT CASE

DEFINITION

2(w)

It means a case relating to an offence not being a warrant case.

 

 

 

2(x)

It means a case relating to an offence punishable by death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding 2 years.

INSTITUTION

 

In Summon Case, only one procedure is followed, Whether Instituted On A Police Report Or A Complaint

 

In Warrant Case, two procedures are followed namely, one adopted by the magistrate in case instituted on a police report while the other in case instituted otherwise than on a police report.

 

PROCEDURE

The procedure for summons cases is simpler and fast.

The procedure for warrant cases are difficult and slower. Warrant cases deal with offences serious issues than those in summons cases.

APPROVAL

The magistrate gives consent to convert a summons case into a warrant case under the code.

 

Whereas a warrant case cannot converted into a summons case.

 

APPEARANCE

 

After the issue of summons, in a summons cases, the accused may plead guilty by post without appearing before the magistrate.

 

But no such provision exists in trial of a warrant case.

CROSS-EXAMINATION

 

While in a summons case he gets only one opportunity to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses.

In a warrant case, the accused gets more than one opportunity to cross- examine the prosecution witnesses.

DEFENSE.

It does not gives greater opportunity for defense.

It gives greater opportunities for defense.

 

 

 

CASE LAWS

 

1.      Padamnath v. Ahmad Dobi- 13 August, 1969, 1970 CriLJ 1700

The issue of summon or warrant in any cases it does not changes the nature of the case, suppose warrant is issued in a summon case it does not make the case a warrant case.  


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

10 LANDMARK JUDGEMENT OF SECTION 482 CrPC.

  10 LANDMARK JUDGEMENT OF SECTION 482 CrPC. SECTION 482 defines the inherit powers of high court. To give effect to an order under the Cr.P.C. To prevent the abuse of the process of court. To otherwise secure the end of justice. Didigam Bikshapathi V. State of Andhra Pradesh (2008) 2SCC 403 The power possessed by the High Court U/S 480 of the Cr.P.C is very wide and the very plenitude of the power requires great caution in its exercise. Court must be careful to see that its decision in exercise of this power is based on sound principles. The inherent power should not be exercised to stifle a legitimate prosecution.   Dharampal v. Ramshri AIR 1993 SC 1361 When once the High Court on certain facts refused to entertain jurisdiction under section 482 Cr.P.C ,  a second application on the same ground cannot be entertained. Power U/S 482 not to be exercised to grant bail Hamida v. Rashid @ Rasheed (2008) 1 SCC 474 The power U/S 482 Cr.P.C cannot be exercised by the High C...