Fahmin Al Fuad: Imagine a man accused of stealing a motorcycle worth Tk 3 lakh. He says he is innocent. The owner wants the motorcycle back. Under the old rules, a case like this could take years to finish. Under the amended Code of Criminal Procedure, a magistrate can now deal with it much faster. That is good news for a tired justice system. But it raises a hard question: how fast is too fast when a person’s liberty is at stake?
The pressure behind the change is real. UNB reported that, according to the Law Minister, 4,041,924 cases were pending in the subordinate courts on 31 December 2025. Summary trial is the Code’s old shortcut for minor offences, set out in sections 260 to 265. For a long time, low value limits kept many property cases outside it. A summary trial is not a trial without rules. Section 262 says the procedure in Chapter XX still applies, and the sentence cannot exceed two years’ imprisonment.
Three changes matter. The Code of Criminal Procedure (Amendment) Act, 2026, dated 10 April 2026 and effective from 10 August 2025, raised the value limit in section 260 from Tk 10,000 to Tk 5 lakh. This covers theft, dishonest misappropriation, receiving stolen property and helping to hide it. A theft worth Tk 3 lakh, once outside the list, now sits inside it. Next, the new section 264A says the framing of charges, the evidence, the examination of the accused and the judgment may, if practicable, be completed in the same session at any place within the court’s jurisdiction. Judge Sheikh Md Muhibbullah wrote in The Daily Star that this answers the old demand for quick, on-the-spot justice to be handled by judicial officers rather than executive officers. Finally, section 414 now bars an appeal only where the fine is Tk 5,000 or less, up from Tk 200.
There is a detail many readers will miss. Section 260 says magistrates “shall” try these offences summarily, not “may”. So a much larger group of property cases will move onto the fast track. A theft of Tk 4 lakh is not small for a poor defendant, and he can still face up to two years in prison.
Supporters have a strong case. Delay punishes everyone. The accused lives under suspicion for years, the victim waits, and witnesses forget. Article 35(3) of the Constitution guarantees a speedy and public trial. Done properly, summary trial gives life to that promise and frees court time for serious crimes.
But speed must not turn into haste. The words “if practicable” and “any place” give magistrates flexibility, and they also create risks. An accused person in a village may not find a lawyer within hours. Witnesses may not be ready. A hearing held outside a courtroom may not be open and orderly, although section 352 of the Code says courts must be open. A thin record also makes an appeal harder to win.
Four steps would protect fairness. First, magistrates should record that the accused heard the charge, was given time to find a lawyer, and was offered legal aid if he could not pay. Second, when a case is finished in one session away from the court, the order should state why that was practicable and where it was held. Third, the Law Ministry and the Supreme Court should publish data every six months on how many cases are tried summarily, how long they take, how many end in conviction and how many are appealed. Fourth, Parliament should review the new limits after a year, to see whether speed has improved justice or only the numbers.
Bangladesh needs faster courts. A system that takes decades to decide a theft case fails the accused and the victim alike. But justice is not measured by how many files are closed. The test of a summary trial is whether the person before the magistrate was heard, defended and judged on evidence. Fast should still mean fair.
E-mail: fahminrifti19@gmail.com
