Case Note & Summary
The appeal arose from a judgment of the Punjab and Haryana High Court upholding the Sessions Court's order allowing an application under Section 319 CrPC to summon six additional accused in a murder case. The deceased, Suraj, was killed after being lured by his wife's relatives on the pretext of a compromise in ongoing matrimonial disputes. The complainant (PW9, Harkesh) deposed that appellants Raju and Kalu took the deceased on their motorcycle, claiming the other appellants had called for a compromise. The Supreme Court examined the deposition and found it consistent with the FIR. Applying the test from Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab, the Court held that the evidence created a prima facie case stronger than mere probability, justifying summoning under Section 319 CrPC. The Court dismissed the appeal, leaving factual issues for trial.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Summoning of Additional Accused - Section 319 CrPC - Power to summon persons not accused if they 'appear' guilty from evidence - The word 'appear' means clear to comprehension, requiring stronger evidence than mere probability but short of proof leading to conviction - Held that the deposition of PW9 provided sufficient prima facie evidence to summon the appellants (Paras 7-8).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court and Sessions Court correctly exercised power under Section 319 CrPC to summon additional accused based on deposition of a witness.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the summoning of appellants under Section 319 CrPC to face trial in Sessions Case No. 54/2010.
Law Points
- Section 319 CrPC
- prima facie case
- degree of satisfaction
- Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab
Case Details
Criminal Appeal No. 134 of 2019 (Arising out of SLP (Criminal) No. 1705/2015)
L. Nageswara Rao, Mohan M. Shantanagoudar
The State of Haryana and Anr.
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against summoning of additional accused under Section 319 CrPC in a murder case.
Remedy Sought
Appellants sought to quash the order summoning them to face trial.
Filing Reason
Appellants were summoned by Sessions Court under Section 319 CrPC based on deposition of PW9.
Previous Decisions
Sessions Court allowed application under Section 319 CrPC; High Court upheld that order.
Issues
Whether the deposition of PW9 provided sufficient evidence to summon the appellants under Section 319 CrPC.
Submissions/Arguments
Appellants argued that the evidence was insufficient and raised factual issues.
Respondent supported the summoning order based on prima facie evidence.
Ratio Decidendi
Under Section 319 CrPC, the court may summon additional accused if evidence creates a prima facie case stronger than mere probability, as per the test in Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab.
Judgment Excerpts
The word 'appear' means 'clear to the comprehension', or a phrase near to, if not synonymous with 'proved', and imparts a lesser degree of probability than proof.
The test that has to be applied is of a degree of satisfaction which is more than that of a 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, may lead to conviction of the proposed accused.
Procedural History
Missing complaint lodged by brother of deceased; dead body found; three accused tried for murder; during trial, PW9 deposed implicating six additional persons; complainant filed application under Section 319 CrPC; Sessions Court allowed application; High Court upheld order; Supreme Court dismissed appeal.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 319, 125
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 302, 34, 498A, 506, 323, 324, 504
