Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal against the dismissal of a revision application concerning the summoning of additional accused under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973. The FIR was lodged by the father of the prosecutrix, alleging that his minor daughter had been abducted and raped by three individuals. After investigation, only one accused was charged, while the appellants were initially excluded. The trial court later summoned the appellants as additional accused based on the prosecutrix's statement, which had not yet been cross-examined. The appellants contended that the High Court erred in dismissing their revision application, arguing that the term 'evidence' in Section 319 should include only those statements that have been subjected to cross-examination. The court analyzed conflicting views from various High Courts regarding the admissibility of untested witness statements. It concluded that the term 'evidence' in Section 319 encompasses statements made before cross-examination, allowing the court to act on them for summoning additional accused. The court emphasized that the right to cross-examine arises only after an accused is formally added to the proceedings. Ultimately, the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the trial court's decision to summon the appellants as additional accused based on the prosecutrix's statement.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Evidence Admissibility - Definition of 'Evidence' - Criminal Procedure Code, 1973, Section 319 - The court held that the term 'evidence' in Section 319 includes statements recorded before cross-examination, allowing for the summoning of additional accused based on such statements. The court clarified that cross-examination rights arise only after an accused is formally added, not prior to that stage (Paras 1-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the statement of a prosecution witness without cross-examination constitutes 'evidence' under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming the trial court's decision to summon the appellants as additional accused based on the prosecutrix's statement.
Law Points
- Evidence admissibility
- Cross-examination rights
- Section 319 Cr.P.C. interpretation
- Additional accused summoning
- Judicial discretion
