V. S. JETLEY, J. C. :- The short question for consideration in references nos. 2 and 4 of 1968 made by the learned Sessions Judge, Panjim, is whether for the purposes of Sections 263, 264 and 414 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, (hereinafter referred to as 'the Code') the sentence passed or authorised, in cases tried summarily, is a decisive consideration.

2. The material facts in reference no. 2 are that the respondent Maria Santana Almeida and two others were tried summarily by the learned Magistrate, Quepem, for an offence under Section 323 of the Indian Penal Code. The learned Magistrate found that there was no evidence to convict the respondent Maria Santana Almeida, but, as regards the other two respondents, they were convicted under this section and sentenced to pay a fine of Rs. 25/-or, in default, to undergo S. I. for 8 days. The respondent Maria Santana Almeida was acquitted. The facts in reference no. 4 are that respondent Dumentina Caetano Cardozo was tried summarily for an offence under Section 427 of the Indian Penal Code. The same Magistrate convicted her under this section and sentenced her to pay a fine of Rs. 50/- or, in default of payment of fine, to un