https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292403 An offence punishable with imprisonment up to three years was treated as a warrant case, so even in a summary trial the procedure for warrant cases had to be followed as far as may be under Section 262 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Magistrate instead proceeded as if it were a summons case, examining and cross-examining witnesses on the same date without the sequential stages of charge, proper opportunity for cross-examination after plea, and defence evidence. A trial conducted contrary to the prescribed Code procedure is illegal, the defect is not cured by Section 537, and the deviation caused prejudice to the accused. The conviction and sentence were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh trial. en-us Tue, 23 Apr 1968 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Dec 2020 09:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292403 An offence punishable with imprisonment up to three years was treated as a warrant case, so even in a summary trial the procedure for warrant cases had to be followed as far as may be under Section 262 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. The Magistrate instead proceeded as if it were a summons case, examining and cross-examining witnesses on the same date without the sequential stages of charge, proper opportunity for cross-examination after plea, and defence evidence. A trial conducted contrary to the prescribed Code procedure is illegal, the defect is not cured by Section 537, and the deviation caused prejudice to the accused. The conviction and sentence were set aside and the matter was remitted for fresh trial. Case-Laws Indian Laws Tue, 23 Apr 1968 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=292403