Case Note & Summary
The Petitioner, Jagannath Dattu Torane, the original complainant, filed a Criminal Writ Petition challenging the order of the Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras, Solapur, in Special Case No.13 of 2013, rejecting his application under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) for impleading Respondent No.2, Prakash Shamrao Patil, as an additional accused. The case arose from FIR No.49 of 2013 lodged on 19th March 2013 at Akluj Police Station, Solapur, against 25 accused persons for offences under Sections 436, 324, 338, 337, 147, 148, 143, 149 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC) and Sections 3(1)(10) and 3(2)(4) of the Prevention of Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989. The Petitioner contended that in the FIR and in the statements of eye-witnesses PW-3 Vikas Namdeo Torane and PW-7 Sunil Namdev Torane, it was clearly stated that the co-accused, while assaulting the Petitioner, had stated that Respondent No.2 (referred to as 'Prakash Bapu') had instructed them not to spare the Petitioner and to assault him, and that he would take care of the matter. The Petitioner argued that not only in the FIR and Section 161 CrPC statements, but also in the evidence recorded before the Trial Court, the Petitioner (PW-1) and the two eye-witnesses deposed about this instigation. Therefore, there was sufficient material to implead Respondent No.2, who is the husband of co-accused Shrilekha Patil and father of co-accused Abhishek Patil, as an additional accused. The Trial Court rejected the application, leading to the present petition. The High Court held that the Trial Court's order was erroneous as the evidence on record clearly disclosed the involvement of Respondent No.2 in instigating the assault. The Court set aside the impugned order and allowed the application under Section 319 CrPC, directing the Trial Court to implead Respondent No.2 as an additional accused and proceed with the trial.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 319 CrPC - Summoning Additional Accused - Power to summon additional accused can be exercised if evidence recorded during trial discloses prima facie involvement - The court must be satisfied that there is sufficient evidence against the proposed accused - Held that the Trial Court erred in rejecting the application as the evidence of PW-1, PW-3 and PW-7 clearly showed instigation by Respondent No.2 (Paras 4-6).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the Trial Court erred in rejecting the application under Section 319 CrPC for impleading Respondent No.2 as an additional accused despite evidence of instigation.
Final Decision
The impugned order dated 1st March 2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Malshiras, Dist. Solapur, in Special Case No.13 of 2013, is set aside. The application at Exhibit-151 under Section 319 CrPC is allowed. The Trial Court is directed to implead Respondent No.2 as an additional accused and proceed with the trial in accordance with law.
Law Points
- Section 319 CrPC
- power to summon additional accused
- evidence recorded in trial
- instigation
- prima facie case
