Case Note & Summary
The case involved an appeal by two appellants against the order of the Sessions Judge who had impleaded them as co-accused in a criminal case concerning an attack on the informant's brother. The incident occurred on 27th February 1990, leading to a First Information Report being lodged that named twenty individuals as assailants. Following the investigation, a charge-sheet was filed against eighteen individuals, excluding the appellants, as their involvement was not established. The Sessions Judge later received an application under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to include the appellants as accused based on the material available. The appellants contended that the Sessions Judge lacked jurisdiction to implead them without evidence being recorded during the trial. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, clarifying that Section 319 could only be invoked when evidence was presented during the trial indicating the involvement of the appellants. The court emphasized that the power under Section 319 is limited to situations where evidence surfaces during the inquiry or trial, and cannot be exercised preemptively based on investigation materials alone. The court also noted that once a case is committed to the Sessions Court, it has the jurisdiction to take cognizance of the offence, but the exercise of power under Section 319 requires the existence of evidence from the trial (Paras 1.01-1.09).
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Impleading of Accused - Jurisdiction of Sessions Court - Section 319 Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - The Sessions Court can only exercise the power under Section 319 if evidence is led during the trial indicating the complicity of a person not previously named as an accused. The court held that the power cannot be invoked before the trial has commenced and evidence has been recorded (Paras 1.01-1.09).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a Court of Session can summon a person not named in the police report to stand trial under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure without recording evidence.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, affirming that the Sessions Court could not exercise the power under Section 319 without evidence being led during the trial.
Law Points
- Cognizance of offence
- Impleading of accused
- Jurisdiction of Sessions Court
- Evidence requirement
- Code of Criminal Procedure
- 1973
