Personal Appearance Of Accused Not Necessary At Stage Of Examination Under Section 251 CrPC: Andhra Pradesh High Court

In a recent case, the Andhra Pradesh High Court reiterated that the personal appearance of the accused at the stage of examination under Section 251 CrPC is not required.

The single bench of Justice K. Sreenivasa Reddy opined that in a summons case, when the accused is brought before the magistrate, Section 251,CrPC requires that the accused be informed of the offence and asked to plead guilty or make a defense, but a formal charge is not necessary. The purpose is to ensure the accused knows the details of the offence and can defend himself. Moreover, it is not mandatory for the accused to be present in court, and the counsel can also represent.

The petitioner has been accused under Sections 138 and 142 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. He filed an application before the Magistrate under Section 205 Cr.PC seeking dispensation from personal attendance in court.

The reason cited for this was his frequent travel abroad for his children's education, which makes it difficult for him to attend court on every adjournment.

In January 2023, the application was dismissed by the Magistrate on the ground that the petitioner has to undergo examination under Section 251 Cr.P.C.

The accused filed a petition under Section 482 of the Cr.P.C. before the High Court. The petition challenged the Magistrate's order dismissing his application to dispense with personal appearance in court.

The counsel for petitioner Sri P. Veera Reddy, argued that the accused petitioner can be represented by his authorized pleader for examination under Section 251 Cr.P.C.

The reliance was made on a High Court decision in K. Rama Chandra Murthy v. State of Andhra Pradesh.

The counsel for the respondent objected to it and suggested that the petitioner should provide an undertaking that he will not claim any prejudice from not being personally examined under Section 251 Cr.P.C.

After hearing both the parties, the Court decided that the personal appearance of the petitioner herein at the stage of Section 251 Cr.P.C. examination is not required and duly authorized pleader can be examined under Section 251 Cr.P.C., subject to the condition that the petitioner will give an undertaking that he would not take the plea of prejudice of his being not personally examined under Section 251 Cr.P.C

The court also explained that, “The object of the said Section ( Section 251) is only to the extent of apprising the accused person of the particulars of the offence that has been alleged against him and it is only to enquire from him whether he pleads guilty or he has any defence to make. For such a common questionnaire, it is not essential for the accused to be present before the Court, instead his counsel can also represent the same. A perusal of the said provision does not say that the same is mandatory.If the accused comes forward with an undertaking that his counsel would appear on his behalf and whatever his counsel represents before the Court will be accepted by the accused, presence of the accused can be dispensed with.”

The High Court by referring the judgements of Vijay Mallya v. GMR Hyderabad International Airport Limited and Y.S. Jagan Mohan Reddy v. Central Bureau of Investigation said, “It is difficult to construe how the object of the section is defeated if a pleader duly authorised by the accused appears before the Court in the place of the accused at the stage of Section 251 Cr.P.C.”

In light of the above facts and principles, the court has decided to set aside the order passed by the Magistrate. Consequently, the petition stands allowed, subject to the condition that the petitioner gives an undertaking that he will not take the plea of prejudice for not being personally examined under Section 251 Cr.P.C

Case title- Potluri Vara Prasad v. Usha Pictures And Financiers

Citation: 2023 LiveLaw (AP) 8

Click Here To Read/Download Order