Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court considered the appeal against the summoning of Sukhpal Singh Khaira as an additional accused under Section 319 CrPC after the trial court had already pronounced judgment convicting nine co-accused and acquitting one on the same day. The case arose from an FIR under the NDPS Act, Arms Act, and IT Act. The trial court, while delivering judgment, also allowed the prosecution's application under Section 319 CrPC to summon the appellant. The High Court upheld this order. The Supreme Court framed three questions: whether the power under Section 319 CrPC can be exercised after judgment is pronounced; whether it can be exercised in a bifurcated trial against absconding accused; and what guidelines apply. The Court held that the power under Section 319 CrPC must be exercised before the pronouncement of judgment, as the trial concludes with the judgment and the court becomes functus officio. However, in a split-up trial against absconding accused, the power can be exercised during the pendency of that separate trial. The Court set aside the summoning order against the appellant in the main trial but left it open for the trial court to consider summoning in the bifurcated trial if appropriate.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Summoning Additional Accused - Section 319 CrPC - Power to summon additional accused must be exercised before pronouncement of judgment - The trial court cannot summon an additional accused under Section 319 CrPC after it has pronounced judgment of conviction and sentence against the co-accused on the same day, as the trial concludes with the judgment and the court becomes functus officio. (Paras 1-10) B) Criminal Procedure - Split-up Trial - Section 319 CrPC - In a bifurcated trial against absconding accused, the trial court can exercise power under Section 319 CrPC during the pendency of that separate trial, as it is a distinct proceeding. (Paras 2-4) C) Criminal Procedure - Guidelines for Section 319 CrPC - The court must exercise power under Section 319 CrPC only during the pendency of the trial, based on evidence that appears to implicate the person, and the order must be passed before the judgment is pronounced. (Paras 5-7)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court has power under Section 319 CrPC to summon additional accused when the trial against co-accused has ended and judgment of conviction has been rendered on the same date before pronouncing the summoning order; whether such power exists when trial against absconding accused is ongoing in a bifurcated proceeding; what guidelines govern exercise of Section 319 CrPC power
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the summoning order dated 31.10.2017 passed by the trial court and upheld by the High Court, holding that the trial court had no power under Section 319 CrPC to summon the appellant after pronouncing judgment of conviction against the co-accused. However, the Court left it open for the trial court to consider summoning the appellant in the bifurcated trial (Sessions Case No. 217 of 2019) if appropriate.
Law Points
- Section 319 CrPC power must be exercised before pronouncement of judgment
- trial concludes with judgment
- court becomes functus officio after judgment
- split-up trial is a separate trial for Section 319 purposes
