Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court of India heard a criminal appeal arising from a Special Leave Petition concerning the invocation of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The dispute involved the appellant, who had been summoned as an additional accused based on an application filed by the prosecution. The second respondent had lodged an FIR on 27.06.2015 alleging that her husband, who was the appellant's driver, was murdered by the appellant with the help of friends. After investigation, a chargesheet was filed against three persons. During trial, the second respondent deposed on 05.08.2017, stating her conviction that the appellant murdered her husband. On the same day, an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was filed, leading the Sessions Judge, Khiri to summon the appellant by order dated 11.09.2018. The High Court dismissed the appellant's challenge. The core legal issue was whether the courts below erred in invoking Section 319 Cr.P.C. solely based on the second respondent's deposition. The appellant's counsel argued that the courts erred in law, relying on precedents including Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Others and Labhuji Amratji Thakor and Others v. State of Gujarat and Another. The respondents contended that the deposition sufficed for invoking Section 319 Cr.P.C. The Court analyzed the principles from Hardeep Singh, noting that power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly only when strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence led before the court, not in a casual manner. The test requires evidence stronger than mere probability but short of satisfaction that unrebutted evidence would lead to conviction. The Court found that the matter needed reconsideration in light of these principles. Consequently, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and the Sessions Judge's summons order, and remanded the case to the Sessions Judge, Khiri to consider afresh applying the established principles, with directions for the case to be called on 30.09.2021.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Summoning Additional Accused - Section 319 Cr.P.C. - Supreme Court Quashes Summons and Remands for Fresh Consideration - The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment and the Sessions Judge's order issuing summons, and remanded the matter to the Sessions Judge, Khiri for fresh consideration in light of established principles - Held that the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly only when strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence led before the court, not in a casual and cavalier manner, and the test is more than prima facie case as at framing of charge but short of satisfaction that unrebutted evidence would lead to conviction (Paras 3-5).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the courts below erred in law in invoking power under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) solely based on the deposition of the second respondent
Final Decision
The appeal is allowed. The impugned judgment is set aside. The order passed by the learned Sessions Judge issuing summons is set aside. The Sessions Judge, Khiri is directed to consider the matter afresh in the light of the principles enunciated by the Supreme Court, particularly from Hardeep Singh (supra). The Sessions Judge, Khiri will call this case on 30.09.2021 and pass appropriate orders bearing in mind the principles laid down.
Law Points
- Power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is discretionary and extraordinary
- to be exercised sparingly only when strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence led before the court
- not in a casual and cavalier manner
- The test for invoking Section 319 Cr.P.C. is more than prima facie case as exercised at the time of framing of charge but short of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence
- if goes unrebutted
- would lead to conviction
