Discharge not maintainable in summons cases under the Criminal Procedure Code; accused must proceed without a discharge stage.

A summons case under Chapter XX of the Code of Criminal Procedure does not provide for a discharge stage like a warrant case under Section 239, so an accused cannot seek discharge under Section 251. The Patna High Court also noted that the earlier larger Bench view remained binding and had held that interlocutory relief in a summons case is not to be sought by discharge. A contrary decision was distinguished on its different factual and procedural setting. The result is that a discharge petition is not maintainable under Section 251 or under Section 245(2) in such proceedings.

---

---

Issues: Whether a discharge petition could be maintained in a summons case under Section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether such a petition was also maintainable under Section 245(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The complaint arose from offences under Sections 454(5) and 454(5A) of the Companies Act, 1956, triable as a summons case. Chapter XX of the Code, which governs summons cases, does not provide for discharge in the manner contemplated in warrant cases under Section 239. The earlier larger Bench decision held that a summons case does not contemplate a stage of discharge and that the remedy of an accused at an interlocutory stage is not by an application for discharge. The contrary view relied upon by the petitioner was distinguished on the footing that it arose in a different factual and procedural setting and did not displace the binding larger Bench authority.

Conclusion: A discharge petition was not maintainable under Section 251 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and was also not maintainable under Section 245(2) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

---