The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. is discretionary and should be exercised sparingly and only in compelling circumstances when the evidence suggests the involvement of persons in the offence.

Chakradhari Sharan Singh, J. (Oral)

The Constitution Bench decision of Supreme Court in case of Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab, reported in (2014) 3 SCC 92, lays down exhaustively the object and scope of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as the "Cr.P.C."). It also lays down the stage and circumstance for exercise of power under the said provision, inter alia.

2. It clearly lays down that if a person is not named in the First Information Report or a person though named in the First Information Report but has not been charge-sheeted or a person who has been discharged, can be summoned under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. provided that from the evidence it appears that such person can be tried along with the persons already facing trial.

3. Secondly, Posing a question to itself as to what should be the nature of satisfaction and whether power under Section 319 (1) of the Cr.P.C. can be exercised only if the Court is satisfied that the accused summoned will, in all likelihood, be convicted. The Supreme Court has set out, in Hardeep Singh (supra), a distinction between degree of satisfaction required for summoning the original accused and a subsequent accused after commencement of trial, on the basis of evidence led at the trial.

For the purpose of summoning a person, who is not an accused, under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., at the trial, as an accused, the test that is required to be applied is one, which is "more" than prima facie case, as exercised at the time of framing of charge, but sort of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence, if went un-rebutted, would lead to conviction of the person so summoned, the Supreme Court has said, answering the said questions.

4. These are the two points involved in the present case, which stand directly answered in case of Hardeep Singh (supra).

5. The present criminal revision application, under Section 397 read with Section 401 of the Cr.P.C., has been preferred against an order, dated 26.06.2014, passed by learned Sessions Judge, Nawada, in Sessions Trial No. 162 of 2012, arising out of Nawadah P.S. Case No. 367 of 2011. The petitioners were named accused in said Nawadah P.S. Case No. 367 of 2011, registered for the offence punishable under Section 304(B) read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code.

6. The police, upon completion of investigation, submitted charge-sheet against the husband of the deceased, namely, Ram Pravesh Pandit, only and not against these petitioners, who are his family members. The case was, thereafter, committed to the Court of Sessions for trial. The prosecution filed an application, under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., in course of trial, for proceeding against these petitioners also on the ground that evidence, adduced at the trial by the prosecution witnesses, suggested that these petitioners were also involved in commission of the offence.

7. Petitioner nos. 1, 2 and 3 are brothers of the accused, namely, Ram Pravesh Pandit, whereas, petitioner No. 4 is the wife of petitioner no. 1.

8. The said application, preferred under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., has been allowed by the learned Sessions Judge, Nawadah by an order, dated 26.06.2014, which is being assailed in the present criminal revision application.

9. Learned counsel appearing on behalf of the petitioners, assailing the impugned order, has made two fold submissions. He, on placing reliance upon a Supreme Court decision in case of Kishori Singh and Ors. v. State of Bihar and Anr. (AIR 2000 SC 3725), has submitted that since the petitioners were not charge-sheeted by the police, learned trial Court ought not to have exercised power under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. He has placed particular reliance on paragraphs 3 and 9 of the said decision. It has secondly been submitted that power to summon an accused, under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., is an extra ordinary power conferred on the trial Court, which should be exercised with due care and caution, only if compelling r