Prevention of Corruption Act, 1988 · Chapter II: Appointment of Special Judges
Section 6: Power to try summarily
(1) Where a special Judge tries any offence specified in sub-section (1) of section 3, alleged to have been committed by a public servant in relation to the contravention of any special order referred to in sub-section (1) of section 12A of the Essential Commodities Act, 1955 (10 of 1955) or of an order referred to in clause (a) of sub-section (2) of that section, then, notwithstanding anything contained in sub-section (1) of section 5 of this Act or section 260 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), the special Judge shall try the offence in a summary way, and the provisions of sections 262 to 265 (both inclusive) of the said Code shall, as far as may be, apply to such trial:
Provided that, in the case of any conviction in a summary trial under this section, it shall be lawful for the special Judge to pass a sentence of imprisonment for a term not exceeding one year:
Provided further that when at the commencement of, or in the course of, a summary trial under this section, it appears to the special Judge that the nature of the case is such that a sentence of imprisonment for a term exceeding one year may have to be passed or that it is, for any other reason, undesirable to try the case summarily, the special Judge shall, after hearing the parties, record an order to that effect and thereafter recall any witnesses who may have been examined and proceed to hear or re-hear the case in accordance with the procedure prescribed by the said Code for the trial of warrant cases by Magistrates.
(2) Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Act or in the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (2 of 1974), there shall be no appeal by a convicted person in any case tried summarily under this section in which the special Judge passes a sentence of imprisonment not exceeding one month, and of fine not exceeding two thousand rupees whether or not any order under section 452 of the said Code is made in addition to such sentence, but an appeal shall lie where any sentence in excess of the aforesaid limits is passed by the special Judge.
Source: India Code (indiacode.gov.in), the consolidated text published by the Legislative Department, Government of India. Text as updated on India Code on 14 October 2026. Words in square brackets [ ] were inserted or substituted by later amending Acts, and *** marks words omitted by an amendment. The amendment footnotes are not reproduced here. Official text on India Code.
Supreme Court judgments citing the section 6
- Station House Officer, Cbi/Acb/Bangalore v. B.A. Srinivasan and Anr.
- Nabam Rebia, and Bamang Felix v. Deputy Speaker and Others
- Surinderjit Singh Mand & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.
- Devinder Singh & Ors. v. State of Punjab Through CBI
- Nanjappa v. State of Karnataka
- State of Madhya Pradesh & Ors. v. Anand Mohan &Anr.
- State of Punjab v. Labh Singh
- Edmunds Lyngdoh v. State of Meghalaya
- State of Maharashtra Through C.B.I. v. Mahesh G. Jain
- State of M.P. v. Harishankar Bhagwan Pd. Tripathi
- State Through Central Bureau of Investigation v. Parmeshwaran Subramani and Anr.
- Paul Varghese v. State of Kerala and Anr.
- Lalu Prasad@ Lalu Prasad Yadav v. State of Bihar Through CBI (Ahd) Patna
- Dilawar Singh v. Parvinder Singh@ Iqbal Singh and Anr.
- C.S. Krishnamurthy v. State of Karnataka
- Madhya Pradesh Special Police Establishment v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Ors.
- The Assistant Commissioner, Assessment-Ii, Bangalore and Ors. v. M/S. Velliappa Textiles Ltd. and Ors.
- Union of India v. Prakash P. Hinduja and Anr.
- Central Bureau of Investigation Etc. v. V.K. Sehgal and Anr.
- State of Kerala v. V. Padmanabhan Nair
- Vineet Narain and Ors v. Union of India and Anr.
- Mansukhlal Vithaldas Chauhan v. State of Gujarat
- Shri Dinesh Trivedi, M.P. and Ors. v. Union of India and Ors.
- State of Madhya Pradesh v. Dr. Krishna Chandra Saksena
- Habibulla Khan v. State of Orissa and Anr.
- K. Veeraswami v. Union of India and Others