Case Note & Summary
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal filed by Rajesh and others against the judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court, which had confirmed the Trial Court's order summoning them under Section 319 CrPC. The case arose from an FIR lodged by Hukum Singh alleging that on June 12, 2016, his son Bhajji and Hari were attacked by a group of persons, resulting in Hari's death. The appellants were named in the FIR but the investigating agency, after thorough investigation, found them innocent and filed a chargesheet only against four other accused. The appellants were discharged by the Magistrate on applications by the SHO. During the trial of the remaining accused, the prosecution examined PW1 (the complainant) and PW2 (the injured eye witness), who reiterated their earlier statements and implicated the appellants. On this basis, the complainant sought summoning of the appellants under Section 319 CrPC, which the Magistrate allowed, and the High Court upheld in revision. The Supreme Court held that the power under Section 319 CrPC is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly and only when strong and cogent evidence appears against a person. The Court noted that the depositions of PW1 and PW2 were merely a reiteration of their Section 161 statements and did not constitute such evidence, especially in light of the investigation material showing the appellants' innocence and their previous discharge. The Court set aside the summoning order and the High Court's judgment, allowing the appeal.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 319 CrPC - Summoning of Additional Accused - Power under Section 319 CrPC is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly and only when strong and cogent evidence appears against a person during trial - Held that mere deposition of witnesses reiterating their Section 161 statements does not constitute such evidence, especially when investigating agency found the accused innocent and they were previously discharged (Paras 4-10). B) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 319 CrPC - Consideration of Investigation Material - While exercising power under Section 319 CrPC, the court must consider the evidence collected by the investigating officer, including material suggesting innocence of the accused - Held that ignoring such material and summoning accused solely on witness depositions is improper (Paras 4-10). C) Criminal Procedure Code - Section 319 CrPC - Effect of Previous Discharge - Where accused have been discharged on merits after investigation, summoning them under Section 319 CrPC requires stronger evidence than mere oral testimony of witnesses - Held that the earlier discharge is a relevant factor and cannot be lightly overridden (Paras 4-10).
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court and Trial Court erred in summoning the appellants under Section 319 CrPC solely on the basis of depositions of PW1 and PW2, despite the investigating agency finding them innocent and their earlier discharge.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the impugned judgment of the High Court and the order of the Trial Court summoning the appellants under Section 319 CrPC. The appellants were discharged from the case.
Law Points
- Section 319 CrPC power is discretionary and extraordinary
- to be exercised sparingly
- mere reiteration of Section 161 statements during trial does not constitute strong and cogent evidence
- court must consider investigation material suggesting innocence
- previous discharge on merits is a relevant factor.
