CrPC Section 325 - Procedure When Magistrate Can Not Pass Sentence Sufficiently Severe

Section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), 1973, plays a critical role in ensuring justice by empowering subordinate Magistrates to refer cases requiring harsher or distinct punishment to a higher authority—the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM). This provision ensures that individuals accused of offenses receive appropriate sentences in line with the gravity of their crimes, reflecting a well-balanced judicial hierarchy and procedural fairness.

Legal Provision Of CrPC Section 325

“Section 325- Procedure when Magistrate can not pass sentence sufficiently severe

1. Whenever a Magistrate is of opinion, after hearing the evidence for the prosecution and the accused, that the accused is guilty, and that he ought to receive a punishment different in kind from, or more severe than, that which such Magistrate is empowered to inflict, or, being a Magistrate of the second class, is of opinion that the accused ought to be required to execute a bond under Section 106, he may record the opinion and submit his proceedings, and forward the accused, to the Chief Judicial Magistrate to whom he is subordinate.
2. When more accused than one are being tried together, and the Magistrate considers it necessary to proceed under sub-section (1), in regard to any of such accused, he shall forward all the accused, who are in his opinion guilty, to the Chief Judicial Magistrate.
3. The Chief Judicial Magistrate to whom the proceedings are submitted may, if he thinks fit, examine the parties and recall and examine any witness who has already given evidence in the case and may call for and take any further evidence, and shall pass such judgment, sentence or order in the case as he thinks fit, and as is according to law.”

Simplified Explanation Of CrPC Section 325

Section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) is divided into following three subsections:

Section 325(1): Referral By The Magistrate

• When a Magistrate feels that the punishment is beyond his jurisdictional powers, he must:
  • Record his opinion on the question of guilt and the need for a higher punishment or the accused should execute a bond under Section 106.
  • Forward the whole case proceedings, along with the accused, to the Chief Judicial Magistrate (CJM) to whom he is subordinate.

Section 325(2): Multiple Accused

• If several persons are being tried together, then the Magistrate shall send to the CJM all those whom it holds guilty.
• This prevents fragmentation of cases and makes the process of adjudication uniform.

Section 325(3): Powers Of The Chief Judicial Magistrate

• Upon receiving the cases, the CJM has the following powers:
  • Examine the parties before him.
  • Recall and examine any witness examined by the Magistrate.
  • Summon and record further evidence.
  • Pass judgment, sentence, or order according to the law.

Significance Of Section 325

Section 325 emphasizes the balance between hierarchical procedure and delivery of justice.

• Appropriate punishment: Section 325 avoids under-sentencing by the subordinate Magistrates. It ensures that accused guilty of serious offences receive proportionate punishment.
• Hierarchical check: Section 325 creates a specific chain of scrutiny. Subordinate magistrates defer cases requiring harsher penalties to the CJM, who possesses greater sentencing authority.
• Procedural safeguards: Section 325 ingrains protection to the rights of the accused. The CJM re-examines the evidence and may take fresh evidence if needed. Such reviewing reduces chances of error and encourages dispensation of justice.

Case Laws

Following are few judgements related to CrPC Section 325:

Nisha vs. State Of Haryana (2022)

In this case, the Court held the following:

• Referral to the CJM: Section 325 of the CrPC is invoked when a Magistrate believes that an accused is guilty but feels that the punishment they are authorized to award is not sufficient, or that a different kind of punishment is required. In such cases, the Magistrate records his opinion and sends the case to the CJM.
• Powers of CJM under Section 325(3): After the case reaches the court of the CJM, then the CJM can examine parties, recall and examine any witness who has been examined earlier, and can summon any additional evidence which may be required as per the CJM. Later, the CJM can deliver judgment, pass sentence or give any other appropriate order as per the law.
• Not a de novo trial: The court clarified that the powers vested with the CJM under Section 325 do not mean that the CJM should start a fresh trial. It is discretionary power for facilitating the CJM to give judgment on the case before awarding the sentence.
• Discretionary power: The CJM shall have the discretion to examine or recall for re-examination any witness under Section 325. This power is meant to help the CJM in reaching a decision and does not give the accused a right to recall witnesses.
• No duty to recall witnesses: A direction from the Sessions Judge to exercise jurisdiction under Section 325(3) CrPC does not mean the CJM is obligated to recall and re-examine witnesses. Whether to recall witnesses is within the discretion of CJM, provided it serves the cause of justice.
• Purpose of the power: The purpose of the CJM’s power under this section is for the CJM’s satisfaction in passing a final order, but it cannot be used to allow the accused to fill in gaps in their defence or to retry the case.

Lakhan Digarse vs. State Of Madhya Pradesh (2024)

In this case, the Court held the following:

• Section 325(1) is attracted only when the accused is convicted.
• A Magistrate must satisfy himself on evidence that the accused is guilty and that he should be given greater punishment than that which the Magistrate can grant.
• The Magistrate must form an opinion, not pass a finding of guilt, as the CJM is not acting as an appellate or revisional court and cannot review any findings.
• The Magistrate must discuss the skeletal evidence on which they are basing their opinion. The Magistrate need not discuss the entire evidence as if writing a judgment.
• The CJM can examine the parties, recall witnesses, take further evidence, and pass a judgement, sentence or order as they see fit.

Challenges

• Delay in justice: The referral process may prolong the trial period, thereby delaying justice for the victims and the accused.
• Subjectivity in referral: The decision to refer a case is based on the discretion of the Magistrate, which may introduce subjectivity.
• Procedural complexity: In cases where there are several accused, forwarding all the accused to the CJM may complicate the proceedings.

Conclusion

CrPC Section 325 is a pivotal provision for maintaining the integrity and fairness of India’s criminal justice system. It bridges the gap between subordinate Magistrates’ sentencing limitations and the need for proportionate punishment in severe cases. By allowing the Chief Judicial Magistrate to review evidence, recall witnesses, and pass judgments, the section ensures a thorough adjudication process while safeguarding the rights of the accused. Despite its challenges, it remains an essential mechanism to balance judicial discretion and procedural rigor.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) On CrPC Section 325

Here are some common questions about CrPC Section 325 and its implications:

Q1. What is the main purpose of CrPC Section 325?

The primary purpose is to allow subordinate Magistrates to refer cases to the Chief Judicial Magistrate when they believe the punishment required exceeds their jurisdictional powers.

Q2. Can the Chief Judicial Magistrate recall witnesses under Section 325?

Yes, the CJM has the discretion to recall and examine witnesses already examined or summon further evidence if necessary for delivering justice.

Q3. Does Section 325 involve a fresh trial at the CJM level?

No, the provision does not mandate a de novo (fresh) trial. The CJM reviews the proceedings, evidence, and arguments to pass a judgment or sentence.

Q4. When is Section 325 invoked?

Section 325 is invoked when a Magistrate concludes that the accused is guilty but requires a more severe punishment or a different kind of penalty than what the Magistrate can impose.

Q5. What happens if there are multiple accused in a case?

If multiple accused are being tried together and some require referral under Section 325, all guilty individuals are forwarded to the Chief Judicial Magistrate to maintain procedural consistency.

References

• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/31521497/
• https://indiankanoon.org/doc/64787371/
• R V Kelkar's Criminal Procedure, 7th Edn.