Power to try summarily
Section 283 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 deals with power to try summarily. Notwithstanding anything contained in this Sanhita— (a) any Chief Judicial Magistrate; The Act came into force on 01 Jul 2024.
(1) Notwithstanding anything contained in this Sanhita—
(a) any Chief Judicial Magistrate;
(b) Magistrate of the first class,
shall try in a summary way all or any of the following offences:—
(i) theft, under sub-section (2) of section 303, section 305 or section 306 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 where the value of the property stolen does not exceed twenty thousand rupees;
(ii) receiving or retaining stolen property, under sub-section (2) of section 317 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, where the value of the property does not exceed twenty thousand rupees;
(iii) assisting in the concealment or disposal of stolen property under sub-section (5) of section 317 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023, where the value of such property does not exceed twenty thousand rupees;
(iv) offences under sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 331 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023;
(v) insult with intent to provoke a breach of the peace, under section 352, and criminal intimidation, under sub-sections (2) and (3) of section 351 of the Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023;
(vi) abetment of any of the foregoing offences;
(vii) an attempt to commit any of the foregoing offences, when such attempt is an offence;
(viii) any offence constituted by an act in respect of which a complaint may be made under section 20 of the Cattle-trespass Act, 1871 (1 of 1871).
(2) The Magistrate may, after giving the accused a reasonable opportunity of being heard, for reasons to be recorded in writing, try in a summary way all or any of the offences not punishable with death or imprisonment for life or imprisonment for a term exceeding three years:
Provided that no appeal shall lie against the decision of a Magistrate to try a case in a summary way under this sub-section.
(3) When, in the course of a summary trial it appears to the Magistrate that the nature of the case is such that it is undesirable to try it summarily, the Magistrate shall recall any witnesses who may have been examined and proceed to re-hear the case in the manner provided by this Sanhita.
Section 283, The Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Act 46 of 2023).
Replaces a provision of the Code of Criminal Procedure
CRPC 260 Power to try summarily Text carried over almost unchanged 95%
Measured by comparing the text of the two provisions, not taken from an official correspondence table — there is no machine-readable one. See both texts side by side before relying on it.
Both regimes are live. The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force. We never redirect one to the other.
Cross-references
Extracted from the operative text of the enactments themselves. Every destination below exists in our corpus.
This section refers to
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita s. 306 Theft by clerk or servant of property in possession of master
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita s. 317 Stolen property
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita s. 331 Punishment for house-trespass or house-breaking
- Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita s. 351 Criminal intimidation
- s. 303 Power of State Government or Central Government to exclude certain persons from operation of section 302
- s. 305 Prisoner to be brought to Court in custody
- s. 352 Oral arguments and memorandum of arguments
- Cattle-Trespass Act s. 20 Power to make complaints
Related judgements & precedents
These are some judgments that construed this section, and hold precedence value. They hold authority on how to read, interpret and use this section.
-
Securities and Exchange Board of India vs S. K. Shelgikar
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 260, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
Where a special statute expressly or by necessary implication divests lower courts of jurisdiction and vests it in higher courts through amendment, such amendment operates retrospectively to all pending matters, including those where offences were committed before the amendment and proceedings initiated before the amendment, unless the amendment itself expressly provides otherwise. The change of forum in such cases is not merely procedural but is mandated by express statutory language, and no person has a vested right to be tried by a particular forum once proceedings have been initiated. The legislative intent for retrospective application can be inferred from express language divesting jurisdiction from lower courts and vesting it exclusively in higher courts, as evidenced by phrases such as 'No court inferior to that of a Court of Session shall try any offence' and 'all offences committed prior to or after the date of commencement shall be tried by Special Court.'
On this section: Examined whether summary trial procedure available for Magistrate courts applies to SEBI offences; held not applicable as SEBI Act does not expressly provide for summary trial
-
Jiyaul Haq Alias Jamshed vs State of U.p.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 260, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In proceedings under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, which are summary proceedings governed by Sections 262-265 of the Criminal Procedure Code, the provisions of Section 258 CrPC (which provides for stopping proceedings in certain cases and applies only to summon cases trial under Chapter XX of CrPC) are not applicable. Consequently, an accused cannot be discharged from a Section 138 NI Act proceeding merely on the ground of partial repayment of the cheque amount, as Chapter XXI of CrPC (Summary Trial) contains no provision to stop the summary trial or discharge the accused.
On this section: Deals with summary trial; distinguished from Chapter XX (Summon Cases) to establish that different procedural rules apply
-
Sri Debojit Das vs Sri Manoj Saraf& ORS.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 260, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
In proceedings under the Negotiable Instrument Act, a trial court cannot dismiss a complaint based on documents submitted by the accused without formally recording evidence and examining witnesses. Even in summary trials under Section 260 Cr.P.C., the procedure for recording evidence mandated by Section 262 Cr.P.C. must be followed. Factual allegations regarding the issuance of cheques, the existence of legally enforceable debt, and the absence of business transactions must be established through evidence, not through unexamined documents submitted with the petition. The trial court must proceed with the hearing and consider materials produced during the course of evidence before deciding the case.
On this section: Section 260 provides for summary trial procedure in certain cases. The respondent's counsel argued that NI Act cases can be tried summarily under this section. The court held that Section 260 cannot be read in isolation and must be read with Section 262.
-
Tanaji Dinkar Wadakar vs Veer Chaphekar Nagari Sahakari Pat Sanstha Ltd.
Decided under Code of Criminal Procedure 260, which this section replaces. The court did not have this Act before it.
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
The non-obstante clause in Section 143(1) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 confers independent jurisdiction on a Judicial Magistrate of the First Class to conduct summary trials of offences under Chapter XVII of the Act without requiring special empowerment by the High Court under Section 260(1)(c) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The second proviso to Section 143(1) permitting conversion to warrant trial can only be invoked when it appears that imprisonment exceeding one year may be imposed or for other reasons it is undesirable to try summarily, and such order must be passed after hearing the parties and recording reasons. At the pre-trial stage, absent such circumstances, a Magistrate is justified in rejecting an application for warrant trial.
On this section: Requires special empowerment by High Court for Magistrate to conduct summary trials; court held this is overridden by Section 143 NI Act
The holding above is the ratio decidendi as extracted from the judgment by eCourts India, reproduced unaltered — it is a rendering of the court's reasoning, not a substitute for its words. Read the order itself before relying on it.
Questions about Section 283
What have the courts held on Section 283 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
Securities and Exchange Board of India vs S. K. Shelgikar (21 Aug 2017) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below, though it was decided under CRPC 260, which this section replaced -- the court never mentioned this Act: Examined whether summary trial procedure available for Magistrate courts applies to SEBI offences; held not applicable as SEBI Act does not expressly provide for summary trial. Another 3 judgments on this section are set out below, 1 of them from the Supreme Court. They run from 2008 to 2023.
How do I find court cases under Section 283 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita?
In judgments and charge sheets this section is written several ways, and each form finds a different set of orders. These search the full text of every order eCourtsIndia holds, best matches first: BNSS 283, section 283 BNSS, section 283 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita. People searching for it also type bnss 283 2 and 283 bnss act. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 4 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Securities and Exchange Board of India vs S. K. Shelgikar (21 Aug 2017).
What should I read with Section 283 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 306 (Theft by clerk or servant of property in possession of master), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 317 (Stolen property), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 331 (Punishment for house-trespass or house-breaking), Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita 351 (Criminal intimidation), and on 4 further provisions, so none of them can safely be read on its own. 3 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. It carries forward CrPC 260 (Power to try summarily), so the judgments decided under that provision are the case law on this one.
When did Section 283 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita come into force?
Section 283 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, cited as BNSS 283, came into force on 01 Jul 2024, having been enacted on 25 Dec 2023. It is in force as at the date shown on this page.
Other sections of this Act
- 359. Compounding of offences1355 words
- 187. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty-four hours1122 words
- 2. Definitions956 words
- 243. Trial for more than one offence930 words
- 35. When police may arrest without warrant881 words
- 480. When bail may be taken in case of non-bailable offence823 words
Source and method. Compiled from the enactments of Parliament and of the State legislatures as published on India Code, and republished together with commentary and other original matter under section 52(1)(q)(ii) of the Copyright Act, 1957. Structured, cross-referenced and maintained by eCourtsIndia. Text as in force on 15 Oct 2026. This page is not a substitute for legal advice.