SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2022 Supreme(P&H) 37

IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH
Jaishree Thakur, J.
Gurjinder Singh and another – Appellant
Vs.
State of Punjab and another – Respondent
CRM-M-7448 of 2021 (O&M)
Decided On : 20-01-2022

Advocates:
Advocate Appeared:
For the Appellant :Mr. G.P.S. Bal, Advocate for the petitioners.
For the Respondent:Mr. R.S. Khaira, AAG Punjab., Mr. Sandeep Gahlawat, Advocate for respondent No.2.

The power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly and with caution, and requires strong and cogent evidence against the person being summoned.

Headnote:

Section 482 - Summoning under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. - IPC 328, 363, 376-D - [Summary of Acts and Sections: Section 319 of Cr.P.C., Section 173 of Cr.P.C., Indian Evidence Act, Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 3 SCC 92] - The court discussed the procedure under Section 173 of Cr.P.C., the power to summon a person as an additional accused under Section 319 of Cr.P.C., and the legal principles established in the case of Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 3 SCC 92. The court emphasized that the power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly and with caution, and requires strong and cogent evidence against the person being summoned.

Fact of the Case:

The case involved an application under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioners who were summoned to face trial as additional accused in a case involving charges under IPC Sections 328, 363, 376-D. The petitioners argued that they were falsely implicated and that the supplementary challan declaring them innocent should have been considered.

Finding of the Court:

The court dismissed the petition, stating that the supplementary challan declaring the petitioners as innocent should be considered part of the court record and that the power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. is to be exercised sparingly and requires strong evidence.

Issues: The issues involved the summoning of the petitioners as additional accused, the consideration of the supplementary challan, and the discretion in exercising the power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C.

Ratio Decidendi: The court emphasized that the power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly and with caution, and requires strong and cogent evidence against the person being summoned.

Final Decision: The court dismissed the petition, upholding the summoning of the petitioners as additional accused and emphasizing the discretionary nature of the power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C.

JUDGMENT :

Jaishree Thakur, J.

CRM-18731-2021

1. Allowed as prayed for.

2. Annexures P-1 to P-7 are taken on record, subject to all just exceptions.

CRM-M-7448-2021

1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Cr.P.C.'), as the petitioners herein are aggrieved by the order dated 20.02.2019 passed by the Judge, Special Court, SAS Nagar, under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., whereby the petitioners have been summoned to face trial as additional accused in an FIR No.230 dated 29.11.2017, under Sections 328, 363, 376-D of the Indian Penal Code (for short 'the IPC'), registered at Police Station Lalru, District SAS Nagar, along with co-accused Gursewak Singh.

2. In brief, the facts of the case are that the aforesaid FIR came to be registered against Gursewak Singh (who is already facing the trial) and the two petitioners herein, Gurjinder Singh and Parminder Singh. The statement of the prosecutrix was recorded, wherein she stated that on the intervening night of 13/14.11.2017, she had been kidnapped and forcibly taken by 3 boys, who committed rape upon her, and that she had been exploited physically and sexually. She was dropped near a hotel in village Kurali and at that time, she noted the registration number of the car as PB- 65-R-8599. She was threatened that in case, she disclosed about the incident, she and her entire family would have to face the consequences of the same. The prosecutrix took a lift from a passer-by and was met by her maternal uncle, who told her that she was being searched for and a missing report was lodged. Out of fear, the prosecutrix did not disclose anything about the aforesaid incident, either to the police or her relatives. Her marriage, which had been fixed for 19.11.2017, was broken. After a few days, when she had an acute pain in her stomach, she was taken to the Government Hospital Derabassi, it was then that she disclosed to her parents about the incident of rape upon her and that she had been exploited sexually. The matter was investigated and accused Gursewak Singh was arrested on 03.02.2018. A report under section 173(2) of the Cr.P.C was submitted in the court on 21.04.2018 and charges framed only against Gursewak Singh, as inquiry against the present two petitioners was still pending. Thereafter, the trial commenced against accused Gursewak Singh only and the prosecutrix was examined as PW1 and she was subjected to lengthy cross-examination on 26.07.2018. On the said very date when the prosecutrix was examined as PW1 viz. 26.07.2018, the trial court had directed the SHO of Police Station Lalru to file the status report qua the role of the two petitioners herein, consequent to which, a supplementary challan under Section 173(8) of the Cr.P.C. was filed before the trial court, declaring petitioners herein namely Gurjinder Singh and Parminder Singh as innocent. Thereafter on 11.09.2018, an application under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. was filed by the prosecutrix to summon the petitioners herein as additional accused to face the trial along with accused Gursewak Singh, which was allowed on 20.02.2019. Due to non-appearance of the petitioners despite issuance of non-bailble warrants, proclamations were issued against the petitioners herein and they were declared as proclaimedoffeners by an order dated 03.10.2019 by the trial court. The petitioners herein were allowed anticipatory bail by the High Court and they were directed to appear before the trial court. Thereupon, the petitioners herein appeared before the trial court and furnished the requisite bail bonds. Thereafter, when the matter was fixed for framing of charges against the petitioners herein, the petitioners herein filed an application for setting aside/recalling the impugned summoning order as well as an application under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. for discharge. Aggrieved against the summoning order dated 20.02.2019, the petitioners herein have also assailed the same in the instant petit

      Click Here to Read the rest of this document
      1
      2
      3
      4
      5
      6
      7
      8
      9
      10
      11
      SupremeToday Portrait Ad
      supreme today icon
      logo-black

      An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

      Please visit our Training & Support
      Center or Contact Us for assistance

      qr

      Scan Me!

      India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

      For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

      whatsapp-icon Back to top