Supreme Court Restores Summoning Order Against Accused in Murder Case — High Court's Quashing Found Erroneous.

In Favour of Prosecution
  • 0
Judgement Image
Font size:
Print

Case Note & Summary

The case involved an appeal against a judgment of the Allahabad High Court which quashed an order summoning Kapil Dev Singh to face trial for the murder of Nigam Singh. The incident occurred on 15.12.1995 when Nigam Singh's family members were murdered, leading to a trial against several accused. On 16.3.2002, during the ongoing trial, Nigam Singh was shot after refusing to retract his testimony against the accused. Rajendra Singh, the first informant, lodged an FIR against Kapil Dev Singh and others. The Sessions Judge initially summoned Kapil Dev Singh based on the FIR and witness statements. However, the High Court later quashed this order, citing the presence of Kapil Dev Singh in a meeting at the time of the incident, relying on statements recorded under Section 161 Cr.P.C., which are not substantive evidence. The Supreme Court found that the High Court erred in relying on inadmissible evidence and that the burden of proof for the alibi lay with Kapil Dev Singh, which he failed to establish. The court restored the Sessions Judge's order summoning Kapil Dev Singh to face trial and requested the High Court to expedite the hearing of a related criminal revision challenging the acquittal of a co-accused. The appeal was allowed, and the High Court's judgment was set aside.

Headnote

A) Criminal Procedure - Summoning of Accused - Restoration of Summoning Order - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 319 - The Supreme Court held that the High Court relied on inadmissible evidence to quash the order summoning the accused, which was based on the FIR and corroborative statements made during the trial. The court emphasized that the evidence must be admissible and that the burden of proof for an alibi lies with the accused, which was not met in this case. Held that the order of the High Court was set aside and the summoning order was restored (Paras 10-13).

Subscribe to unlock Headnote Subscribe Now

Issue of Consideration

Whether the High Court erred in quashing the order summoning the accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

Subscribe to unlock Issue of Consideration Subscribe Now

Final Decision

The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's judgment, and restored the order summoning Kapil Dev Singh to face trial under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

Law Points

  • Section 319 Cr.P.C.
  • Section 482 Cr.P.C.
  • Section 161 Cr.P.C.
  • Section 103 Evidence Act
  • alibi
  • summoning of accused
  • admissibility of evidence
Subscribe to unlock Law Points Subscribe Now

Case Details

2007 LawText (SC) (10) 111

Appeal (crl.) 1019 of 2007

2007-08-06

G.P. Mathur, P.K. Balasubramanyan

Shri Manoj Goel, Shri S.R. Singh

Rajendra Singh

State of U.P. & Anr

Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more) Subscribe Now

Nature of Litigation

Criminal appeal against the quashing of a summoning order.

Remedy Sought

Rajendra Singh sought to restore the summoning order against Kapil Dev Singh.

Filing Reason

The High Court quashed the order summoning Kapil Dev Singh under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

Previous Decisions

The Sessions Judge had previously summoned Kapil Dev Singh based on the FIR and witness statements.

Issues

Whether the High Court erred in quashing the summoning order under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Whether the evidence relied upon by the High Court was admissible.

Submissions/Arguments

The appellant argued that the FIR and witness statements justified the summoning of Kapil Dev Singh. The respondent contended that he was in a meeting at the time of the incident, establishing an alibi.

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court's reliance on inadmissible evidence to quash the summoning order was erroneous; the burden of proof for an alibi lies with the accused, which was not established.

Judgment Excerpts

The statement of those witnesses do not leave any room for doubt that the applicant was present in the meeting of Nagar Nigam at the time of incident. The High Court relied upon wholly inadmissible evidence to set aside the order passed by the learned Sessions Judge.

Procedural History

The Sessions Judge summoned Kapil Dev Singh under Section 319 Cr.P.C., which was later quashed by the High Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C.

Acts & Sections

  • Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: Section 319, Section 482, Section 161
  • Indian Evidence Act: Section 103
Subscribe to unlock full Legal Analysis Subscribe Now
Related Judgement
High Court High Court Allows Pensioner’s Petition for Stepping Up of Pay on Parity with Junior; Holds Denial After Earlier Tribunal Order in Identical Case Violates Article 14. Pay Fixation Anomaly Must Be Remedied for Senior Employees When Juniors Draw Highe...
Related Judgement
High Court Madras High Court Directs Return of Driving License Pending Criminal Investigation in Fatal Accident Case. Division Bench Precedent Applied: Licensing Authority Cannot Initiate Action Until Criminal Court Finds Licensee Guilty.