In a recent judgment by the Supreme Court of India, the power of summoning additional accused was revisited. The case involved a detailed analysis of legal principles and precedents, shaping the decision-making process. This summary delves into the key aspects of the case, shedding light on the implications for future legal proceedings.
Facts
- The FAC considered the arguments presented by both parties.
- The FAC examined the relevant laws and precedent cases.
- The FAC provided detailed reasoning for its decision.
- The FAC’s decision was based on a thorough analysis of the facts presented.
- The FAC’s decision was in accordance with established legal principles.
- Appeal challenges the judgment of the Allahabad High Court dismissing the petition filed by the appellant.
- The trial court conducted a trial for an offence under Section 302 IPC.
- Conviction and acquittal orders were passed for different accused individuals.
- Appellant was summoned for trial under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. after conviction and sentencing of other accused.
- A discussion on the case of Sukhpal Singh Khaira vs State of Punjab regarding the summoning of additional accused after the conclusion of trial.
Also Read: Quashing of Detention Order in the Case of Appisseril Kochu Mohammed Shaji
Analysis
- The power under Section 319 of CrPC should be invoked and exercised before the pronouncement of the order of sentence in case of a judgment of conviction of the accused.
- The trial court has the power to summon additional accused in a bifurcated trial when the trial proceeds in respect of absconding accused after securing their presence, based on evidence recorded in the split-up trial.
- The summoning order should precede the conclusion of the trial by the imposition of sentence in case of a conviction.
- If the judgment of conviction and sentence, along with the order of summoning under Section 319 of CrPC, are passed on the same date, the court needs to examine the facts and circumstances of the case.
- The competent court must follow certain guidelines while exercising power under Section 319 of CrPC.
- If evidence is found or an application under Section 319 is filed regarding the involvement of any other person in the offence based on recorded evidence, the trial shall pause at that stage.
- The court must first decide the need to summon the additional accused before passing any orders.
- Decisions on summoning, joint trials, or other proceedings should be made accordingly upon re-hearing.
- The Constitution Bench has held that a summoning order passed after an order of acquittal or imposing of sentence in the conviction may not be sustainable.
- This ruling clarifies the legal position on the validity of summoning orders issued post-acquittal or post-conviction.
- It emphasizes the need for legal processes to adhere to established norms, especially in cases where a decision of acquittal or conviction has already been made.
Also Read: Environmental Impact Assessment of GPP Operations in Pune: A Supreme Court Verdict
Decision
- On 21 March 2012, orders of conviction and acquittal were passed in the case of different accused in the first half of the day.
- If the court decides to summon additional accused and hold a joint trial, the trial must be conducted afresh.
- If a separate trial is decided for summoned accused, the main case may be decided first and then proceedings can commence against the summoned accused.
- In case of acquittal, the order shall be passed in the main case before proceedings against summoned accused.
- If Section 319 of CrPC is invoked after arguments and the case is reserved for judgment, it should be set for re-hearing.
- The impugned judgment and order dated 25 August 2021, along with the order of summoning the present appellant under Section 319 of CrPC are quashed and set aside.
Also Read: High Court Misdirects in Proviso to Section 45 PMLA Case: Supreme Court Verdict
Case Title: DEVENDRA KUMAR PAL Vs. STATE OF U.P (2024 INSC 679)
Case Number: Crl.A. No.-003727-003727 – 2024
