Section 346 CrPC: Procedure When a Court Refers a Contempt Case to a Magistrate
Section 346 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 explains what a court may do when an offence committed in its view or presence should not be disposed of through the limited summary procedure under Section 345. The corresponding provision under the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 is Section 385 BNSS.
Text of Section 346 CrPC, 1973
346. Procedure where Court considers that case should not be dealt with under section 345
(1) If the Court in any case considers that a person accused of any of the offences referred to in section 345 and committed in its view or presence should be imprisoned otherwise than in default of payment of fine, or that a fine exceeding two hundred rupees should be imposed upon him, or such Court is for any other reason of opinion that the case should not be disposed of under section 345, such Court, after recording the facts constituting the offence and the statement of the accused as hereinbefore provided, may forward the case to a Magistrate having jurisdiction to try the same, and may require security to be given for the appearance of such person before such Magistrate, or if sufficient security is not given, shall forward such person in custody to such Magistrate.
(2) The Magistrate to whom any case is forwarded under this section shall proceed to deal with, as far as may be, as if it were instituted on a police report.
Meaning and scope of Section 346 CrPC
The provision concerns certain offences affecting the administration of justice that occur in a court's view or presence. It provides an alternative to the immediate, limited procedure under Section 345 CrPC. Instead of imposing a summary penalty itself, the court may send the matter to a Magistrate with jurisdiction to try it.
When can a case be forwarded?
- When the court considers imprisonment appropriate other than imprisonment merely for non-payment of a fine.
- When the court considers a fine exceeding Rs 200 appropriate under the wording of Section 346 CrPC.
- When the court considers, for another reason, that summary disposal under Section 345 is unsuitable.
What must the forwarding court record?
The court must record the facts constituting the alleged offence and the accused person's statement as contemplated by the provision before forwarding the case. The accused is not automatically convicted merely because the matter is referred.
Security for appearance and custody
The court may require security to secure the person's appearance before the competent Magistrate. Where sufficient security is not furnished, Section 346 permits the court to forward the person in custody. Any decision remains subject to applicable procedural safeguards and judicial scrutiny.
Procedure before the receiving Magistrate
Under subsection (2), the Magistrate deals with the case, as far as may be, as though it were instituted on a police report. This permits a fuller process than the summary disposal contemplated by Section 345.
Corresponding law: Section 385 BNSS, 2023
Section 385 BNSS, titled Procedure where Court considers that case should not be dealt with under section 384, substantially carries forward the referral mechanism in Section 346 CrPC. Its subsection (1) refers to offences under Section 384 BNSS and its subsection (2) directs the receiving Magistrate to proceed, as far as may be, as if the case were instituted on a police report.
| Subject | CrPC, 1973 | BNSS, 2023 |
|---|---|---|
| Summary procedure for certain contempt offences | Section 345 | Section 384 |
| Forwarding case for regular proceedings | Section 346 | Section 385 |
| Threshold in forwarding provision | Fine exceeding Rs 200 | Fine exceeding Rs 200 in the published Section 385 text |
| Summary fine ceiling in preceding section | Rs 200 under Section 345 | Rs 1,000 under Section 384 |
Important drafting distinction: the higher summary fine ceiling in Section 384 BNSS does not itself change the Rs 200 reference appearing in the text of Section 385 BNSS. Consult the official consolidated law and any later amendments before relying on a monetary limit.
Practical example
Suppose a person deliberately disrupts judicial proceedings in the court's presence. If the presiding court concludes that the alleged conduct calls for a fuller trial rather than the limited procedure for certain contempt offences, it may record the relevant facts and the person's statement and forward the case to the competent Magistrate. The Magistrate then follows the procedure required by Section 346(2) CrPC or, where applicable, Section 385(2) BNSS.
Official legislation and related reading
- India Code - official central legislation portal (search for the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023).
- Bureau of Police Research and Development - BNSS reference PDF.
- Police-hosted CrPC and BNSS comparative reference.
- CrPC sections and legal provisions - LawDadi.
Frequently asked questions
What is Section 346 CrPC?
It provides for forwarding certain offences committed in the view or presence of a court to a competent Magistrate when summary disposal under Section 345 is inappropriate.
Which BNSS provision corresponds to Section 346 CrPC?
Section 385 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 corresponds to Section 346 CrPC and refers to the summary procedure in Section 384 BNSS.
Can the court require security for appearance?
Yes. The forwarding court may require security for appearance before the Magistrate. If sufficient security is not furnished, the provision permits forwarding the person in custody.
How does the receiving Magistrate proceed?
The Magistrate deals with the forwarded case, as far as may be, as if it had been instituted on a police report.
Is the monetary threshold now Rs 1,000?
Section 384 BNSS provides a higher summary fine ceiling of Rs 1,000, but the published text of Section 385(1) BNSS continues to refer to a fine exceeding Rs 200. These distinct statutory figures should not be silently substituted.
This article is general legal information, not case-specific advice. Statutory wording and procedural applicability should be checked against the official legislation and relevant court orders.