Analysis of Section 319 CrPC in Summoning Additional Accused

The instant Criminal Appeal originates from a judgment dated 27.01.2020 whereby the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh (in short ‘High Court’), while setting aside the order dated 12.07.2018 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh, has ordered the summoning of the Appellants under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter ‘Cr.P.C.’) as additional accused. The family of Aamir comprised of Akhlima (mother), Juhru (father) – Appellant No.1, Sonam (sister) – Appellant No.2 and Rijwan (brother-in-law) – Appellant No.3.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/criminal/2-1-verdict-halts-conviction-dissent-highlights-potential-flood-of-unclear-legal-rulings/

Soon thereafter, Respondent No 1 filed an application under section 319 Cr.P.C before the Trial Court to summon the Appellants as additional accused.

Discontented with their summoning by the High Court, the Appellants are before us.

Deepkaran Dalal, learned Counsel for the Ist Respondent, strongly defended the approach of the High Court and submitted that, given the allegations made in the FIR and the deposition of Respondent No.1, the High Court was justified in summoning the Appellants, who were actively involved in harassing the deceased for not bringing enough dowry and which eventually led to the unfortunate death of Rukseena just within 7 months of her marriage. The power under Section 319 CrPC can be exercised only on the basis of the evidence adduced before the court during a trial.

Only where strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence led before the court that such power should be exercised and not in a casual and cavalier manner. In Section 319 CrPC the purpose of providing if “it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence” is clear from the words “for which such person could be tried together with the accused”.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/case-type/criminal/analysis-of-cheating-and-forgery-in-passport-case/

has to be broadly understood and thus materials which have come before the Court in course of enquiry can be used for : – (i) corroboration of evidence recorded by Court after commencement of trial; (ii) for exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C.; and (iii) also to add an accused whose name is shown in column no.2 of the chargesheet.

is filed, regarding involvement of any other person in committing the offence based on evidence “recorded at any stage in the trial” before passing of the order on acquittal or sentence, it shall pause the trial at that stage and the Court shall proceed to decide the fate of the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C.; (ii) if the Court decides to summon an accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C., such summoning order shall be passed before proceeding further with the trial in the main case and depending upon the stage at which the order is passed, the Trial Court shall apply its mind to the fact as to whether such summoned accused is to be tried along with other accused or separately; and (iii) if the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C.

We may hasten to add that with a view to prevent the frequent misuse of power to summon additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C, and in conformity with the binding judicial dictums referred to above, the procedural safeguard can be that ordinarily the summoning of a person at the very threshold of the trial may be discouraged and the trial court must evaluate the evidence against the persons sought to be summoned and then adjudge whether such material is, more or less, carry the same weightage and value as has been testified against those who are already facing trial.

The record reveals that after the application under section 319 Cr.P.C was dismissed by the Trial Court, Respondent No.1 was called on 06.12.2018 for further examination-in-chief as PW-1.

Also Read: https://newslaw.in/supreme-court/discrepancy-in-date-of-birth-courts-legal-analysis/

There is no cogent material that Appellant No 2, even after her marriage with Appellant No 3, continued to reside in her parents’ house or that they used to inter-meddle in the day to day marital life of the deceased and Aamir. 1

Case Title: JUHRU Vs. KARIM (2023 INSC 148)

Case Number: Crl.A. No.-000549-000549 / 2023

Click here to read/download original judgement

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *