Back
2005 Supreme(SC) 1835
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.N. Agrawal, A.K. Mathur, JJ.
Golla Devavaram & another – Appellants
Versus
Karanam Balarama Krishna Murthy & another – Respondents
Criminal Appeal No. 926 of 2003
Decided On : 15-12-2005
The court emphasized the requirement to assess sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused at the stage of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Headnote:
Section 319 - Criminal Procedure - Court finds sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused based on evidence, sets aside High Court's dismissal of petition under Section 319, and restores trial court's order summoning the accused.
Fact of the Case:
The trial court summoned Respondent 1 under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure based on evidence of several witnesses showing complicity of the respondent with the crime. The High Court set aside the trial court's order and dismissed the petition under Section 319, leading to this appeal.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that there were sufficient grounds to proceed against Respondent 1 based on the evidence of the witnesses, and held that the High Court was not justified in setting aside the trial court's order summoning the respondent.
Issues: The issue revolved around the sufficiency of grounds to proceed against the accused under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.
Ratio Decidendi: At the stage of Section 319 of the Code, the court is required to determine whether there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused based on the evidence presented.
Final Decision: The appeal was allowed, the High Court's order was set aside, and the trial court's order summoning Respondent 1 under Section 319 of the Code was restored.
ORDER :
B.N. Agrawal, J.
The trial court summoned Respondent 1 under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short "the Code") on the basis of evidence of PWs 1, 3, 6, 8, 9, 12, 20 and 22 as their evidence shows complicity of this respondent with the crime. Against the said order, when Respondent 1 moved the High Court under Section 482 of the Code, the order passed by the trial court has been set aside and the petition under Section 319 of the Code dismissed. Hence, this appeal by special leave.
2. We have heard learned counsel for the parties at length.
3. It is well settled that at the stage of Section 319 of the Code, the court is required to see as to whether there are sufficient grounds to proceed against the accused. In view of the evidence of the aforesaid witnesses showing complicity of Respondent 1 with the crime, we are of the view that there were sufficient grounds to proceed against the said respondent and the High Court was not justified in setting aside the order of summoning the said respondent passed by the trial court.
4. Accordingly, the appeal is allowed, the impugned order passed by the High Court is set aside and the order summoning Respondent 1 under Section 319 of the Code passed by the trial court is restored. Needless to say that this order shall not in any manner prejudice the case of Respondent 1 during trial.
Appeal allowed.
