38.6c New Delhi, India, Thursday, August 07, 2025
Top Stories Supreme Court
Political NEWS Legislative Corner Celebstreet International Videos
Subscribe Contact Us
close
Judiciary

Court Requires Strong Evidence To Summon An Accused U/S 319 CrPC: SC [Read Judgment]

By LawStreet News Network      28 February, 2019 12:00 AM      0 Comments
Court Requires Strong Evidence To Summon An Accused U/S 319 CrPC: SC [Read Judgment]

The Supreme Court on February 27, 2019, has held that the court can exercise power under Section 319 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, only where strong and cogent evidence occurs against an accused from the evidence led before the court.

A Bench comprising of Justice R. Banumathi and Justice Subhash Reddy was hearing appeals filed against the order passed by the Allahabad High Court wherein it had affirmed the order of the trial court summoning the appellants under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for the offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860.

Facts of the case

In this case, a complaint was filed by the father of the victim against the appellants under Sections 304-B, 498A, 302 IPC and under Sections 3 and 4 of the Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961. However, the appellants were not named as accused in the chargesheet since they stood exonerated by the Investigating Officer.

During the trial, an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was filed by the prosecution seeking to summon the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC stating that their names were mentioned in the FIR and also in the evidence of PW-1 and PW-3. The Trial Court allowed the application on the ground that prima facie evidence was available against the appellants.

This order was challenged by the appellants who sought a revision of the same. The High Court dismissed the revision petition observing that there are specific allegations against the revisionists and therefore, there is no illegality or impropriety in the order of the trial court. Aggrieved by the same, the appellants approached the Supreme Court.

Supreme Court judgment

The court referred to Section 319(1) Cr.P.C. and stated that the section empowers the Court to proceed against any person not shown as an accused if it appears from the evidence that such person has committed any offence for which such person could be tried together along with the accused. It is fairly well settled that before the court exercises its jurisdiction in terms of Section 319 Cr.P.C., it must arrive at satisfaction that the evidence adduced by the prosecution, if unrebutted, would lead to conviction of the persons sought to be added as the accused in the case.

Reliance was placed on the judgments in Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Others and Sarabjit Singh and Another v. State of Punjab and Another.

In Hardeep Singh case, it was held that the Power under Section 319 Cr.P.C is a discretionary and an extraordinary power. It is to be exercised sparingly and only in those cases where the circumstances of the case so warrant. It is not to be exercised because the Magistrate or the Sessions Judge is of the opinion that some other person may also be guilty of committing that offence. Only where strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence led before the court that such power should be exercised and not in a casual and cavalier manner.

Applying the principles laid down in the above case, the court held that there was no prima facie case made out for summoning the appellants and to proceed against the appellants for the offence punishable under Section 302 IPC.

The Court further added that under Section 319 Cr.P.C., a person can be added as an accused invoking the provisions not only for the same offence for which the accused is tried but for any offence; but that offence shall be such that in respect of which all the accused could be tried together.

With this view, the court set aside the order of the High Court and allowed the appeals.



Share this article:

User Avatar
About:


Leave a feedback about this
  PREVIOUS POST Two Autolifters Lifted
TRENDING NEWS

sc-approves-tamil-nadus-with-you-stalin-scheme-slaps-rs-10-lakh-cost-on-aiadmk-mp
Trending Judiciary
SC approves Tamil Nadu's 'With You Stalin' scheme; slaps Rs 10 lakh cost on AIADMK MP

SC upholds Tamil Nadu’s ‘With You Stalin’ scheme, slams AIADMK MP with ₹10L fine for misuse of law to target DMK amid similar schemes nationwide.

06 August, 2025 03:12 PM
sc-asks-ec-to-file-response-to-plea-seeking-reasons-for-excluding-65-lakh-voters-in-bihars-sir
Trending Judiciary
SC asks EC to file response to plea seeking reasons for excluding 65 lakh voters in Bihar's SIR

SC seeks EC’s reply on plea alleging exclusion of 65 lakh voters in Bihar during electoral roll revision; hearing set for August 12.

06 August, 2025 03:16 PM

TOP STORIES

sc-to-first-consider-maintainability-of-review-against-2022-judgment-on-eds-powers-under-pmla
Trending Judiciary
SC to first consider maintainability of review against 2022 judgment on ED's powers under PMLA

SC to first decide if review pleas on ED powers under PMLA are maintainable; hearing on Karti Chidambaram’s plea set for August 6.

01 August, 2025 10:58 AM
sc-recalls-may-2-judgment-scrapping-jsw-steels-resolution-plan-for-bhushan-power-and-steel-ltd
Trending Business
SC recalls May 2 judgment scrapping JSW Steel's resolution plan for Bhushan Power and Steel Ltd

SC recalls its May 2 verdict cancelling JSW Steel’s ₹19,300 Cr resolution plan for Bhushan Power; matter to be heard afresh on August 7.

01 August, 2025 11:13 AM
electronic-communication-not-valid-mode-of-service-of-notice-under-section-35-bnss-sc
Trending Judiciary
Electronic communication not valid mode of service of notice under Section 35 BNSS: SC [Read Order]

SC holds WhatsApp or email not valid for notice under Section 35 BNSS due to arrest risk; personal service required to safeguard liberty.

01 August, 2025 11:25 AM
sc-quashes-criminal-case-against-actor-mohan-babu-son
Trending CelebStreet
SC quashes criminal case against Actor Mohan Babu, son for dharna during 2019 General Elections [Read Judgment]

SC quashes case against Mohan Babu, son for 2019 dharna; says it was peaceful protest, no offence made out under electoral or criminal laws.

01 August, 2025 02:18 PM

ADVERTISEMENT


Join Group

Signup for Our Newsletter

Get Exclusive access to members only content by email