The scope and ambit of Section 319 of the Code have been well settled by the Supreme Court’s Constitution Bench in the case of Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and others, according to a Division Bench of Justices Ajay Rastogi and Abhay S Oka.
“The Constitution Bench has cautioned that the power under Section 319 of the Code is a discretionary and extraordinary power that should be exercised only in those cases where the circumstances of the case so warrant, and the crucial test as noted above has to be applied is one that is more than a prima facie case as exercised at the time of framing of charge, but short of satisfaction to the extent that the evidence, if unrebutted, would lead to coercion.”
Section 319 CrPC gives the trial court the authority to prosecute those who aren’t the accused but whom the court believes committed the crime based on evidence acquired during the investigation or trial.
The complainant’s motion under Section 319 CrPC to call the appellant Sagar as an accused to face trial in a murder case was denied by the trial court in this case.
The trial court had rejected the application because the complainant was not an eyewitness to the crimes alleged to have been performed by the appellant, and the appellant’s involvement was not stated in the chargesheet.
The Allahabad High Court overruled the trial court’s decision, resulting in the current Supreme Court appeal.
The Supreme Court based its decision in Harshdeep on the principle that the power under Section 319 CrPC is discretionary and unusual, and should be used only when the facts of the case merit it.
In reference to the High Court’s order, the Bench held that the High Court had neglected to consider the Supreme Court’s essential principles in invoking Section 319 of the CrPC, which were considered by the trial judge.
As a result, the Supreme Court granted the appeal and set aside the High Court’s decision.
Advocate-on-Record Anoop Prakash Awasthi and Advocate Parthvi Ahuja appeared for the petitioner.
Advocates-on-Record Vishwa Pal Singh, Sanchit Garga, advocates Ashish Pandey, Sandeep Singh, Shashi Kumar and Nikunj Jain appeared for the respondents.
Case: Sagar v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Others.
