Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court addressed an appeal concerning the power of a Magistrate to summon an individual not named in a police report under Section 190(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. The dispute arose from an FIR lodged by the mother of a victim alleging abduction and rape by Yogesh and associates. The police report named Yogesh and Rupa as accused, but the victim's statement under Section 164 CrPC implicated the appellant, Nahar Singh. The Chief Judicial Magistrate initially dismissed an application to summon Nahar Singh, but the Revisional Court remanded the matter, leading to summons being issued. The High Court affirmed this, holding that cognizance is of an offence, not an offender, and the Magistrate could summon based on corroborative evidence. The legal issue was whether a Magistrate, under Section 190(1)(b), can summon persons not named in the police report or column (2). The appellant argued that such summoning is impermissible under Section 190(1)(b) and should be under Section 319 CrPC after evidence collection. The court analyzed that while cognizance is of an offence, the Magistrate's power under Section 190(1)(b) is limited to the police report and cannot extend to summoning individuals not named therein. The court held that the proper mechanism is Section 319, which allows summoning additional accused during trial based on evidence. The High Court's judgment was set aside, the summons against Nahar Singh were quashed, and the trial was to proceed only against the chargesheeted accused.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Cognizance and Summoning - Magistrate's Power Under Section 190(1)(b) CrPC - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Section 190(1)(b) - Magistrate taking cognizance on police report cannot summon persons not named as accused in the police report or in column (2) of the report - Held that such power is not available under Section 190(1)(b) and the proper course is under Section 319 CrPC after evidence collection (Paras 2, 8-9). B) Criminal Procedure - Investigation and Chargesheet - Role of Magistrate at Cognizance Stage - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, Sections 190, 319 - Magistrate's duty at cognizance stage is to examine police report and materials accompanying it, not to independently investigate or summon based on other evidence - Court emphasized that Magistrate cannot bypass the investigation process and must rely on the police report for summoning under Section 190(1)(b) (Paras 8-9). C) Criminal Procedure - Revision and Appeal - High Court's Error in Affirming Summons - Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 - High Court erred in upholding summons against appellant who was not named in police report, misapplying the principle that cognizance is of offence not offender - Supreme Court set aside High Court judgment and quashed summons, directing trial to proceed against chargesheeted accused only (Paras 2, 8-9).
Issue of Consideration
Whether a Magistrate taking cognizance of an offence on the basis of a police report under Section 190(1)(b) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 can issue summons to any person not arraigned as an accused in the police report and whose name also does not feature in column (2) of such report
Final Decision
Supreme Court set aside the judgment of the High Court and quashed the summons issued against the appellant, directing that the trial shall proceed only against the chargesheeted accused
Law Points
- Cognizance under Section 190(1)(b) CrPC is of an offence
- not of an offender
- Magistrate's power to summon persons not named in police report is limited
- Section 319 CrPC is the appropriate provision for summoning additional accused after evidence collection
- Magistrate must rely on police report and cannot independently summon based on other materials at cognizance stage
