Power Under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Is A Discretionary And Extraordinary Power Which Should Be Exercised Sparingly And Cautiously: Supreme Court

Details of the Case

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF INDIA

CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION

Special Leave Petition (Crl.) No.3746 of 2022

Naveen (Appellant) Vs. State of Haryana and Oth. (Respondent)

Date of Judgement: NOVEMBER 01, 2022

Legal Events

The present appeal filed assailing correctness of order dated 6th January, 2022 passed by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh setting aside order dated 10th February, 2020 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Bhiwani, Haryana, whereby the learned trial Judge rejected the application filed by the complainant under Section 319 CrPC to summon the appellant (accused) to face trial.

Scope and Ambit of Section 319 Cr.P.C.

The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that scope and ambit of Section 319 of Cr.P.C. has been well settled by the Constitution Bench of Supreme Court in Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and others (2014). The relevant paragraphs of the judgement are 105 and 106 which are as follows:

“105. Power under Section 319 CrPC is a discretionary and an extraordinary power. It is to be exercised sparingly and only in those cases where the circumstances of the case so warrant. It is not to be exercised because the Magistrate or the Sessions Judge is of the opinion that some other person may also be guilty of committing that offence. 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.

106. Thus, we hold that though only a prima facie case is to be established from the evidence led before the court, not necessarily tested on the anvil of cross examination, it requires much stronger evidence than mere probability of his complicity. The test that has to be applied is one which is more than prima facie case as exercised at the time of framing of charge, but short of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence, if goes unrebutted, would lead to conviction. In the absence of such satisfaction, the court should refrain from exercising power under Section 319 CrPC. 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”. The words used are not “for which such person could be convicted”. There is, therefore, no scope for the court acting under Section 319 CrPC to form any opinion as to the guilt of the accused.”

The Hon’ble Supreme Court noted that, “the Constitution Bench has given a caution that power under Section 319 CrPC is a discretionary and extraordinary power which should be exercised sparingly and only in those cases where the circumstances of the case so warrant and the crucial test as noticed above has to be applied is one which is more than prima facie case as exercised at the time of framing of charge, but short of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence, if goes unrebutted, would lead to conviction”.

Applying the aforesaid principle, the Apex Court allowed the appeal and consequently order impugned dated 6th January, 2022 passed by the High Court is set aside.

CORAM:

JUSTICE AJAY RASTOGI

JUSTICE C.T. RAVIKUMAR

NEW DELHI

NOVEMBER 01, 2022