Sections 251–259 CrPC vs Sections 274–282 BNSS — Trial of Summons-Cases by Magistrates

In India, Sections 274 to 282 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS) replaced Sections 251 to 259 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) from 1 July 2024. The Magistrate may now release an accused whose accusation is groundless, with the effect of discharge, and must give an absent complainant thirty days before acquitting.

A summons-case is defined negatively: under Section 2(1)(x) BNSS (formerly Section 2(w) CrPC) it is "a case relating to an offence, and not being a warrant-case", and a warrant-case under Section 2(1)(z) is one relating to an offence punishable with death, imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding two years. So this chapter governs the Magistrate's trial of offences punishable with imprisonment up to two years, fine, or both, unless the case is tried summarily under Chapter XXII (Sections 283 to 288 BNSS).

At a glance

These are procedural sections. They create no offence, so neither First Schedule classifies them. Whether a case is a summons-case turns on the punishment for the offence charged.

What changed

Section 251 CrPC → Section 274 BNSS

• New — a proviso: "Provided that if the Magistrate considers the accusation as groundless, he shall, after recording reasons in writing, release the accused and such release shall have the effect of discharge." The main text ends with a colon instead of a full stop to introduce it.
• Identical — the main rule: the particulars of the offence are stated to the accused, who is asked whether he pleads guilty or has any defence, "but it shall not be necessary to frame a formal charge".
• The CrPC as printed carries a Chhattisgarh amendment to Section 251 (Chhattisgarh Act 13 of 2006) adding appearance "through the medium of electronic video linkage". No BNSS State amendment was checked.

Section 252 CrPC → Section 275 BNSS — Identical, word for word, including the heading.

Section 253 CrPC → Section 276 BNSS

• Minor edit — "a summons has been issued under section 206" → "under section 229".
• Minor edit — "a pleader authorised by the accused" → "an advocate authorised by the accused"; "the words used by the pleader" → "the words used by the advocate".

Section 254 CrPC → Section 277 BNSS

• Minor edit — "under section 252 or section 253" → "under section 275 or section 276". Sub-sections (2) and (3), on summoning witnesses and requiring deposit of their reasonable expenses, are unchanged.

Section 255 CrPC → Section 278 BNSS

• Minor edit — cross-references renumbered: "section 254" → "section 277"; "section 325 or section 360" → "section 364 or section 401" (the provisions on a Magistrate who cannot pass a sufficiently severe sentence, and on release on probation or after admonition); "section 252 or section 255" → "section 275 or section 278".

Section 256 CrPC → Section 279 BNSS

• Modified — sub-section (1) now reads that the Magistrate shall, "after giving thirty days' time to the complainant to be present", acquit the accused, unless he thinks it proper to adjourn. Section 256(1) CrPC contained no period.
• Minor edit — proviso: "represented by a pleader" → "represented by an advocate".
• Identical — sub-section (2): the rule applies, so far as may be, where the non-appearance is due to the complainant's death.

Section 257 CrPC → Section 280 BNSS — Identical, word for word.

Section 258 CrPC → Section 281 BNSS — Identical, word for word.

Section 259 CrPC → Section 282 BNSS

• Minor edit — "in the manner provided by this Code" → "by this Sanhita"; "may re-call any witness" → "may recall any witness".

A parallel thirty-day period appears in the neighbouring warrant-case provision: Section 272 BNSS (formerly Section 249 CrPC) allows discharge for the complainant's absence only "after giving thirty days' time to the complainant to be present".

Statutory text (relevant extract)

Extract — Section 274 BNSS:

When in a summons-case the accused appears or is brought before the Magistrate, the particulars of the offence of which he is accused shall be stated to him, and he shall be asked whether he pleads guilty or has any defence to make, but it shall not be necessary to frame a formal charge: Provided that if the Magistrate considers the accusation as groundless, he shall, after recording reasons in writing, release the accused and such release shall have the effect of discharge.

Extract — Section 279(1) BNSS (words added to Section 256(1) CrPC in italics):

If the summons has been issued on complaint, and on the day appointed for the appearance of the accused, or any day subsequent thereto to which the hearing may be adjourned, the complainant does not appear, the Magistrate shall, after giving thirty days' time to the complainant to be present, notwithstanding anything hereinbefore contained, acquit the accused, unless for some reason he thinks it proper to adjourn the hearing of the case to some other day:

Extract — Section 281 BNSS (unchanged from Section 258 CrPC), opening words:

In any summons-case instituted otherwise than upon complaint, a Magistrate of the first class or, with the previous sanction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, any other Judicial Magistrate, may, for reasons to be recorded by him, stop the proceedings at any stage without pronouncing any judgment …

How it works — the steps of a summons trial

1. Appearance and accusation (Section 274). When the accused appears or is brought before the Magistrate, the particulars of the offence are stated and the accused is asked whether he pleads guilty or has a defence. No formal charge is framed. If the Magistrate considers the accusation groundless, he records reasons and releases the accused; the release "shall have the effect of discharge" (proviso).
2. Plea of guilty (Section 275). The plea is recorded as nearly as possible in the accused's own words, and the Magistrate "may, in his discretion, convict him thereon". Conviction on the plea is not automatic.
3. Plea by post in petty cases (Section 276). Where a special summons issued under Section 229, the accused may send "by post or by messenger" a letter with the plea and the fine specified in the summons, or an advocate authorised by him may plead guilty. The Magistrate may convict in his absence and sentence him to pay the specified fine.
4. Trial if not convicted (Section 277). The Magistrate hears the prosecution and takes its evidence, then hears the accused and takes defence evidence. On application by either side he may summon a witness to attend or produce a document, and may first require deposit of the witness's reasonable expenses.
5. Judgment (Section 278). If the Magistrate finds the accused not guilty he records an acquittal. If guilty, he passes sentence "according to law", unless he proceeds under Section 364 (referring a case for a more severe sentence) or Section 401 (probation or admonition). Under Section 278(3) he may convict of any offence triable under the chapter that the facts admitted or proved show, "if the Magistrate is satisfied that the accused would not be prejudiced thereby".
6. Complainant absent (Section 279). In a case on complaint, if the complainant does not appear, the Magistrate — after giving thirty days' time to be present — acquits, unless he adjourns. He may instead dispense with attendance where the complainant is represented by an advocate or the prosecuting officer, or where personal attendance is unnecessary. The rule extends, "so far as may be", to non-appearance because of death.
7. Withdrawal (Section 280). Before a final order, a complainant who satisfies the Magistrate of sufficient grounds may be permitted to withdraw against all or any of the accused; the Magistrate "shall thereupon acquit" them.
8. Stopping proceedings (Section 281). In a summons-case instituted otherwise than upon complaint, a Magistrate of the first class, or any other Judicial Magistrate with the previous sanction of the Chief Judicial Magistrate, may stop the proceedings for recorded reasons. After the principal witnesses have been examined, the result is an acquittal; otherwise, a release with the effect of discharge.
9. Conversion (Section 282). If the offence is punishable with imprisonment exceeding six months and the interests of justice require it, the Magistrate may re-hear the case as a warrant-case and recall witnesses.

What this means in practice

For the accused. The first hearing under Section 274 is the point at which to argue that the accusation is groundless. The proviso requires the Magistrate to record reasons and release the accused if he considers it so. Section 251 CrPC had no equivalent, and the Supreme Court has held that trial courts have no inherent power to review or recall the issue of summons (below). On a reading of the text, the proviso applies to every summons-case, whether instituted on a police report or on a complaint, because it is not limited as Section 281 is.

For the complainant. Absence now carries a defined step before acquittal: Section 279(1) requires "thirty days' time to the complainant to be present". The safer course remains to appear, or to be represented by an advocate, which lets the Magistrate dispense with personal attendance under the proviso. A company complainant acts through a natural person, who may be changed with the court's permission (Keshvanand, below).

For the prosecution in police-report cases. Section 281 lets the Magistrate stop proceedings in a summons-case instituted otherwise than upon complaint. Its effect depends on timing: an acquittal once the principal witnesses have been recorded, and otherwise a release with the effect of discharge.

Judgments that still matter

No Supreme Court judgment construing the new proviso to Section 274 or the thirty-day period in Section 279 BNSS was found in the corpus searched for this page. Sections 275, 280 and 281 repeat the CrPC text word for word, and the remaining sections repeat it with renumbered cross-references; on a reading of the text, the judgments below remain relevant to the unchanged words.

Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Keshvanand, [1997] Supp. 6 S.C.R. 500 (1997 INSC 819) — 16 December 1997. Bench of M.K. Mukherjee and K.T. Thomas JJ.; judgment by Thomas J. The Magistrate had acquitted a cheque-dishonour accused for the complainant company's absence after the complainant and another prosecution witness had been examined. The Court described the provision — Section 247 of the 1898 Code, "or Section 256 in the new Code" — as affording "some deterrence against dilatory tactics on the part of a complainant", but said that "does not mean if the complainant is absent, court has a duty to acquit the accused in invitum". The court must consider whether the complainant's personal attendance is essential that day and whether an adjournment is justified; "The discretion must, therefore, be exercised judicially and fairly" (report p. 509). It also said that a natural person must represent a company complainant (p. 511) and, in a suggestion made "as a pragmatic proposition", that no Magistrate should insist on the same person throughout, the company being free to seek the court's permission to send a different representative (p. 511). The Court allowed the appeal, set aside the acquittal and the High Court's judgment, and directed the prosecution to proceed from the stage reached (p. 512). The proviso and main text it construed are carried into Section 279 BNSS, now with the thirty-day period.

In Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases Under Section 138 of N.I. Act 1881, [2021] 4 S.C.R. 257 (2021 INSC 257) — 16 April 2021. Bench of five Judges (S.A. Bobde CJI, L. Nageswara Rao, B.R. Gavai, A.S. Bopanna and S. Ravindra Bhat JJ.). The Court recorded that Adalat Prasad v. Rooplal Jindal held subordinate criminal courts have no inherent power and no power of review to recall an order issuing process, and that Subramanium Sethuraman v. State of Maharashtra reiterated this on discharge in a summons case (para 17). It held that "Section 258 of the Code is not applicable to a summons case instituted on a complaint", so it cannot be applied to cheque-dishonour complaints, and that Meters and Instruments v. Kanchan Mehta was not good law "in so far as it conferred power on the Trial Court to discharge an accused" (para 20). It reiterated that there is "no inherent power of Trial Courts to review or recall the issue of summons", without affecting the power under Section 322 CrPC where the court lacks jurisdiction (paras 21, 24(6)–(7)). Section 281 BNSS repeats Section 258 word for word. The Section 274 proviso is a new statutory power; whether it answers the gap the Court identified has not been decided in any judgment read for this page.

Sanjabij Tari v. Kishore S. Borcar & Anr. (2025 INSC 1158) — 25 September 2025. Bench of Manmohan and N.V. Anjaria JJ.; judgment by Manmohan J. The Court allowed the complainant's appeal, set aside the High Court's order acquitting the accused under Section 138 NI Act, and restored the trial and Sessions Court judgments, with a direction to pay ₹7,50,000 in fifteen monthly instalments (para 40). Among general directions for cheque cases, it said the trial court "shall be at liberty (at the initial post cognizance stage) to ask questions, it deems appropriate, under Section 251 Cr.P.C. / Section 274 BNSS, 2023" — including whether the accused admits the cheque, signature and liability, and wishes to compound — and shall record the responses in the order-sheet (para 36, directions F and G). Para 39 says the Magistrate may suggest that the accused plead guilty and exercise the power under Section 255(2) and/or 255(3) CrPC "or 278 of the BNSS, 2023".

Which law applies to your case

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS provides that any appeal, application, trial, inquiry or investigation pending immediately before 1 July 2024 is to be "disposed of, continued, held or made" under the CrPC "as if this Sanhita had not come into force". On a reading of that text, a summons trial pending on that date continues under Sections 251 to 259 CrPC, without the Section 274 proviso or the thirty-day period in Section 279. Trials begun on or after 1 July 2024 follow Sections 274 to 282 BNSS. See which law applies to an offence before 1 July 2024.

Frequently asked questions

What replaced Sections 251 to 259 CrPC?

Sections 274 to 282 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (BNSS), in Chapter XXI, replaced Chapter XX of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 from 1 July 2024. The sections map one to one: 251 to 274, 252 to 275, and so on up to 259 to 282. The procedure is the same in outline; Sections 274 and 279 carry the substantive changes.

Can a Magistrate discharge the accused in a summons case under the BNSS?

Section 274 BNSS adds a proviso: if the Magistrate considers the accusation as groundless, he shall, after recording reasons in writing, release the accused, and the release has the effect of discharge. Section 251 CrPC had no such proviso. In In Re Expeditious Trial of Cases under Section 138 N.I. Act ([2021] 4 S.C.R. 257) the Supreme Court held that trial courts have no inherent power to review or recall the issue of summons.

What happens if the complainant does not appear in a summons case?

Under Section 279(1) BNSS, if the summons was issued on complaint and the complainant does not appear, the Magistrate shall, after giving thirty days' time to the complainant to be present, acquit the accused, unless he thinks it proper to adjourn the hearing. The Magistrate may dispense with attendance where the complainant is represented by an advocate or the officer conducting the prosecution, or personal attendance is unnecessary.

Is acquittal for the complainant's absence automatic?

No. In Associated Cement Co. v. Keshvanand ([1997] Supp. 6 S.C.R. 500) the Supreme Court said the provision protects an accused against a complainant's dilatory tactics, but the court has no duty to acquit merely because the complainant is absent; the discretion must be exercised judicially and fairly. Section 279 BNSS now also requires thirty days' time to the complainant first.

Can a Magistrate stop proceedings in a summons case filed on a complaint?

No. Section 281 BNSS, which repeats Section 258 CrPC word for word, applies only to a summons-case 'instituted otherwise than upon complaint'. A five-Judge Bench held in In Re Expeditious Trial (2021) that Section 258 does not apply to cheque-dishonour complaints and that the contrary finding in Meters and Instruments v. Kanchan Mehta was not good law.

When can a summons case be converted into a warrant-case trial?

Under Section 282 BNSS, when a summons-case relates to an offence punishable with imprisonment for a term exceeding six months and the Magistrate considers it in the interests of justice, he may re-hear the case under the warrant-case procedure and may recall any witness already examined. The only textual changes from Section 259 CrPC are 'Sanhita' for 'Code' and 'recall' for 're-call'.

Can an accused plead guilty by post in a summons case?

Yes, where a special summons for a petty offence has been issued under Section 229 BNSS. Section 276 BNSS lets the accused send the Magistrate a letter containing the plea and the fine specified in the summons by post or messenger, or authorise an advocate to plead guilty; the Magistrate may, in his discretion, convict and sentence him to pay the fine.

Which law governs a summons trial pending on 1 July 2024?

Section 531(2)(a) BNSS provides that a trial pending immediately before 1 July 2024 is to be continued in accordance with the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as if the BNSS had not come into force. On a reading of that text, such a trial continues under Sections 251 to 259 CrPC, without the Section 274 proviso or the thirty-day period in Section 279.

Related

• Sections 206–209 CrPC vs Sections 229–232 BNSS — Special summons in petty offences and committal
• Section 260 CrPC vs Section 283 BNSS — Summary trial
• Section 204 CrPC vs Section 227 BNSS — Issue of process
• Section 320 CrPC vs Section 359 BNSS — Compounding of offences
• Cheque bounce and cheating — NI Act 138 and BNS 318
• CrPC to BNSS master comparison table

Sources

• Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Gazette of India text, cross-checked against the official text): Sections 2(1)(x), 2(1)(z), 272, 274 to 282, 531(2)(a); headings of Sections 229, 359, 364 and 401.
• Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (India Code original text, with State amendments): Sections 2(w), 2(x), 251 to 259; headings of Sections 206, 320, 325 and 360.
• Supreme Court judgments read in full text: Associated Cement Co. Ltd. v. Keshvanand (S_1997_6_500_512_EN.md, report PDF checked); In Re: Expeditious Trial of Cases Under Section 138 of N.I. Act 1881 (2021_4_257_273_EN.md, report PDF checked); Sanjabij Tari v. Kishore S. Borcar & Anr. (Diary_31112-2009_Judgment.md).

This page explains the statutory text and the judgments cited as they stand. It is not legal advice; for a specific case, consult an advocate.