The provision under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code allows for summoning additional accused only if they are part of the same transaction with original accused, which was not substantiated in this case.

JUDGMENT :

MADHAV J. JAMDAR, J.

1. Heard Mr. Vaswani, learned Counsel appearing for the Petitioners and Mr. Yadav, learned APP appearing for the Respondent No.1-State.

2. This Writ Petition is filed by Chandan Suraj Jaiswar i.e. accused No.1 and Suraj Vishwanath Jaiswar i.e. father of the accused No.1. The challenge in this Writ Petition is to the order dated 31^st August 2023 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, City Civil & Sessions Court, Greater Mumbai below Exhibit-121 in Sessions Case No.316 of 2014. By the impugned order, the said Application bearing Exhibit-121 has been rejected. The Petitioner No.1 - Accused No.1 has sought the following reliefs in said Application bearing Exhibit-121:

“A) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to allow this application u/s. 319 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and summon and try the PW1/Mrs. Karuna Jitendra Yadav and her husband PW2/Mr. Jitendra Ramkhilavan Yadav as accused in the above matter for the offence of extortion.

B) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to issue directions under section 156(3) of Cr.P.C. to the Investigating Officer in the above case to investigate the role of the proposed accused PW-1/Complainant, Mrs. Karuna Jitendra Yadav, and Pw-2/Complainant’s husband, Mr. Jitendra Yadav, and to summon and verify the voice recordings of concerned including of the DW-2/Applicant’s father, Mr. Suraj Jaiswar, including voice samples of newly proposed accused as may be needed by the Investigating Officer of this case or as may be considered proper by this Hon’ble Court.

C) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the Investigating Officer in the above matter to record and voice samples of PW-1/Complainant and PW- 2/Complainant’s husband and DW-2/Applicant’s father.

D) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to direct the Investigating Officer to investigate the above matter and file a report.

E) This Hon’ble Court be pleased to grant liberty to the Applicant to make further application in regard with further prayers as may be essential to assist this Hon’ble Court to arrive at a just decision of the case.” (Emphasis added)

3. The said Application has been rejected by the learned Trial Court by the impugned order dated 31^st August 2023 on the ground that under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“Cr.P.C.”), the Court can proceed against any person not being the accused for any offence for which such person could be tried together with the accused. Learned Trial Court has also taken into consideration Section 223 of the Cr.P.C., which makes provisions regarding the persons who can be charged and tried together. The learned Trial Court further observed that the allegations which are part of the Application bearing Exhibit-121 shows that the said instances have taken place after FIR was lodged against the accused and accused has raised the defence of extortion against the Informant and her husband. It has been further observed that these witnesses are not the accused persons in the FIR and that it is not part of the same transaction. On the other hand, the Informant is victim and her husband is witness of the prosecution.

4. The learned Trial Court has also observed that the prosecution has completed the evidence in the year 2018 and thereafter, accused filed application for examination of the defence witnesses and since last five years, accused is examining the defence witnesses. It has been further observ