[S.143 NI Act] Failure To Record Summary Nature Of Proceedings In Order Does Not Vitiate Trial Unless Prejudice Shown: Karnataka High Court

The Karnataka High Court has said that the Appellate Court should be very cautious and exercise the discretion judiciously while remanding the matter for a de-novo trial. A single judge bench of Justice Dr HB Prabhakara Sastry, set aside the order dated September 2, 2013 passed by the appellate court which had in turn set aside the conviction handed down by the trial court under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against the accused and remanded the matter to the trial Court ordering for a de-novo trial. The bench said, "When the evidence of the parties, in the chief examination, cross examination and re-examination were recorded in verbatim and was faithfully placed on record then for merely not recording the order observing that the matter would be tried as a summons case or as a regular trial would not itself vitiate the trial conducted by the Magistrate of the Trial Court, when it has not resulted in miscarriage of justice." The predecessor Magistrate might have decided to try the case as a warrant case, the bench observed, "Therefore, the Magistrate of the Trial Court adopted the procedure which has to be adopted in a warrant trial while recording his evidence. It added, "However, the Sessions Judge's Court only on the point that the Magistrate, before proceeding to record the evidence as in summons case or a warrant case, had not recorded her reason in writing, had set aside the impugned judgment passed by the Trial Court and remanded the matter to the Trial Court for a de novo trial."