Code:
Except as provided in sections 344, 345, 349 and 350, no Judge of a Criminal Court (other than a Judge of a High Court) or Magistrate shall try any person for any offence referred to in section 195, when such offence is committed before himself or in contempt of his authority, or is brought under his notice as such Judge or Magistrate in the course of a judicial proceeding.
Explanation:
This section prevents a Judge or Magistrate from trying a case where they were directly involved in the incident leading to the offence. This ensures impartiality and prevents a conflict of interest. Essentially, it prevents a judge from being both a judge and a witness in the same case.
Illustration:
- A Magistrate issues a warrant for the arrest of a person. The person, upon being arrested, assaults the Police Officer who attempted to execute the warrant. In this scenario, the Magistrate cannot try the offence of assault as it occurred in the execution of their orders.
- A Judge hears a case where a party threatens to harm them if the decision goes against them. The Judge cannot try the offence of threatening a public servant as they were directly involved in the incident.
Common Questions and Answers:
Q: Does this mean a Judge or Magistrate can never try a case involving themselves?
- A: No, this rule only applies when the Judge or Magistrate was directly involved in the incident leading to the offence. If they were merely present at the scene but not directly involved, they can still try the case.
Q: What happens if a Judge or Magistrate is involved in an offence committed before them?
- A: The case will be transferred to another competent court for trial.
Q: Can this section be used to delay proceedings?
- A: This section should not be used to delay proceedings. The court will decide if the Judge or Magistrate’s involvement was direct enough to warrant transfer.