Procedure when Magistrate cannot pass sentence sufficiently severe
Section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 deals with procedure when Magistrate cannot pass sentence sufficiently severe. 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 se The Act came into force on 01 Apr 1974. Repealed by section 531 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (46 of 2023) with effect from 1 July 2024, but conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under it.
(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
1 Ins. by Act 45 of 1978, s. 26 (w.e.f. 18-12-1978).
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.
Section 325, The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Act 2 of 1974).
Now in the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita
BNSS 364 Procedure when Magistrate cannot pass sentence sufficiently severe Text carried over almost unchanged 98%
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 The repealed enactment still governs what happened while it was in force.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
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.
-
Shiv Pal Singh Chouhan vs The State of Madhya Pradesh
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
A Magistrate can forward a case to the Chief Judicial Magistrate under Section 325 CrPC only after hearing evidence for prosecution and defence and forming a reasoned opinion that the accused is guilty and deserves a punishment different in kind or more severe than what the Magistrate is empowered to inflict. The Magistrate cannot forward the case merely on the basis that the accused may deserve a heavier sentence without first hearing evidence and forming a reasoned opinion of guilt. The order forwarding the case must be a short but speaking and reasoned order referring to the evidence for prosecution and defence in brief. The opinion recorded by the Magistrate is not binding on the Chief Judicial Magistrate, who must pass a final judgment independently.
On this section: Procedure when Magistrate cannot pass sentence sufficiently severe - Magistrate must first hear evidence for prosecution and accused, form opinion that accused is guilty, and then opine that accused deserves punishment different in kind or more severe than Magistrate can inflict, before forwarding to Chief Judicial Magistrate
-
Sadhu Ram Gainda vs State
Court's Decision & Legal Precedent
An accused who has suffered nearly four years of judicial custody while awaiting trial, where the trial is progressing slowly with only a fraction of prosecution witnesses examined and is unlikely to conclude in the near future, may be granted bail notwithstanding serious charges and risk factors such as a co-accused being a proclaimed offender, provided stringent bail conditions are imposed to ensure appearance and prevent interference with the trial.
On this section: Referenced for determining maximum sentence that could be imposed, which is 7 years for the offenses charged
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.
Judgments citing this section
These may be obiter dicta or a precedent, for you to study. These are the judgments where this section is quoted.
-
… Further learned Principal Civil Judge, Raichur has submitted the case to the learned Principal Senior Civil Judge and CJM, Raichur to award adequate sentence on accused as per Section 325(1) of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, (for short hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C') and the said case was registered in C.C.No.232/2009. 2. Learned Principal Senior Civil Judge, vide order dated 19.09.2014 sentenced the accused to undergo simple imprisonment for a period of six months for the offence …
-
… Even assuming that the Section 325 of the Indian Penal Code is attracted, the offence alleged can be compounded in accordance with section 320 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. 5. On perusal of the medical certificate, a serious doubt is created whether section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 will apply. 6. In the peculiar facts of the case, considering the consent of the second respondent and the nature of the incident, we find that this is a fit case to exercise powers under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. Accordingly, we pass the …
-
… CRL.REV.P539.2006 Page No.6 of 7 In these circumstances, the impugned order is set aside. It is open to the $6.$ Court of the Magistrate, in future, if upon leading of evidence an eventuality arises that the provisions of Section 323 and or Section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure can be invoked, to invoke the same. This revision petition stands disposed of. Approachement.<br>ADAR DURREZ AHMED BAD $(JU<sub>DE</sub>)$ CRL.REV.P539.2006 September 1, 2006 Page No.7 of 7 …
Questions about Section 325
What have the courts held on Section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
Shiv Pal Singh Chouhan vs The State of Madhya Pradesh (20 Sep 2023) is the leading judgment on this section among those set out below: Procedure when Magistrate cannot pass sentence sufficiently severe - Magistrate must first hear evidence for prosecution and accused, form opinion that accused is guilty, and then opine that accused deserves punishment different in kind or more severe than Magistrate can inflict, before forwarding to Chief Judicial Magistrate. Another 1 judgment on this section is set out below. They run from 2005 to 2023.
How do I find court cases under Section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure?
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: CRPC 325, section 325 CRPC, section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Each opens the full list of orders on eCourtsIndia, where it can be narrowed by court, year and outcome. 2 reported judgments on this section are set out on this page, beginning with Shiv Pal Singh Chouhan vs The State of Madhya Pradesh (20 Sep 2023).
What should I read with Section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, and has it changed?
Its own text turns on section 106 (Security for keeping the peace on conviction), so none of them can safely be read on its own. 5 other provisions in this corpus refer back to it. For anything done on or after 1 July 2024 the provision to read is BNSS 364 (Procedure when Magistrate cannot pass sentence sufficiently severe), which replaced it; conduct before that date is still charged, tried and appealed under this section.
When did Section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure come into force?
Section 325 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, cited as CRPC 325, came into force on 01 Apr 1974, having been enacted on 25 Jan 1974. It is no longer in force.
Other sections of this Act
- 320. Compounding of offences1554 words
- 167. Procedure when investigation cannot be completed in twenty four hours1005 words
- 220. Trial for more than one offence962 words
- 360. Order to release on probation of good conduct or after admonition804 words
- 2. Definitions799 words
- 198. Prosecution for offences against marriage774 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. Recovered from the consolidated text published by India Code (item 330a1099-77ad-4a2e-b22a-769b33398f9e). This page is not a substitute for legal advice.