Supreme Court: Under which circumstances, the high court or Session court should not release the accused on bail only on the ground that offence is triable by JMFC?

 At this stage, we may note that one of the grounds that weighed with the High Court was that the offences against Respondent No. 1 were triable by a Magistrate. However, the High Court overlooked the fact that the offences now alleged against Respondent No. 1 include offences Under Section 409 Indian Penal Code and Section 467 Indian Penal Code also. Significantly, the punishment for offences under these provisions can extend to imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term up to ten years. Similarly, some of the other offences for which Respondent No. 1 has been hauled up for entail a possible sentence of imprisonment over three years. {Para 12}

13. Under Section 29 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19732, a Magistrate of First Class can pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding three years, while a Chief Judicial Magistrate may pass a sentence of imprisonment, excepting imprisonment for a term exceeding seven years or a sentence of death or imprisonment for life. A Metropolitan Magistrate has the same powers as a Magistrate of First Class while a Chief Metropolitan Magistrate is equivalent to a Chief Judicial Magistrate.

14. In that view of the matter, it would always be open to a Magistrate, if he is of the opinion that any of the offences in the case are exclusively triable by a Court of Sessions, to commit the case to a Court of Sessions Under Section 209 Code of Criminal Procedure or Section 323 Code of Criminal Procedure. It may be noted that Under Section 323 Code of Criminal Procedure, such power can be exercised by the Magistrate even during the course of the trial. Therefore, the assumption of the High Court that the case on hand is triable by a Magistrate is premature.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

Criminal Appeal No. 957 of 2026 

Decided On: 17.02.2026

Rakesh Mittal Vs. Ajay Pal Gupta and Ors.

Hon'ble Judges/Coram:

P.V. Sanjay Kumar and K. Vinod Chandran, JJ.

Author: P.V. Sanjay Kumar, J.

Citation: 2026 INSC 161, MANU/SC/0164/2026.

Read full judgment here: Click here.

Print Page

Whether session court can try magistrate triable case if it is counter case to session triable case?

Thus, it has become abundantly clear that by series of 
judicial pronouncement as detailed above,
availed by the Court of Magistrate to co it has conclusively been
held that trial of case and counter-case irrespective of its nature is to
be conducted by the same Court and further, even the cases having
triable by the Court of Magistrate could be fairly tried by the Court of
Sessions in terms of power being entertained by the Court of Sessions
according to Section 26 of the Criminal Procedure Code and for that,
irrespective of nature of evidence, Section 323 of the Cr.P.C. could bemmit the case for that
purpose, which could not be questioned over its proprietary much less
with regard to absence of sufficient materials. That being so, the
learned lower Court rightly committed the case to the Court of
Sessions. Because of the fact that even the Magisterial trial is to be
proceeded with by the Court of Sessions on account thereof, there is
no question of applicability of Section 228(1)(a) of the Cr.P.C.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
Criminal Miscellaneous No.24629 of 2016

Sanjay Kumar, V  The State of Bihar


CORAM:  MR. JUSTICE ADITYA KUMAR TRIVEDI

Date: 19-08-2016
Citation: 2016 CRLJ 4540

Print Page