Back
RAJ BEER SINGH
Vinay Pratap Singh – Appellant
Versus
State Of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned counsel for the opposite party No.3, Sri Kamal Krishna, learned Senior Advocate, assisted by Sri Gaurav Pratap Singh, learned counsel for the opposite party No.4 to 6 and learned AGA for the State.
2. This criminal revision has been preferred against order dated 08.09.2022, passed by the learned Additional Session Judge/F.T.C.-I, Ballia in Session Trial No. 224 of 2008 (State vs. Vinay Singh), Case Crime No.64 of 2006, under Section 302 IPC, police station Haldi, district Ballia, whereby the application filed by the revisionist / accused under Section 319 CrPC, has been rejected.
3. Perusal of record shows that the informant of the case, namely, Radhey Shyam Mishra has lodged the first information report of this case on 5/6.12.2006 at 00:30 hours, alleging that on 05.12.2006 his son Manoj Mishra has gone to see his uncle Brijesh Chaubey at Babuvela. There Manoj along with his uncle Brijesh Chaube was attending a ‘Tilak’ ceremony organised by Ashok Kumar Singh. During that function while programme of dance was going on, Dr. Ashok Kumar Singh, Vaibhav Singh s/o Dr Ashok Kumar Singh, Dr. Abhishek Singh and Dr. Vinod both s/
The discretionary nature of the power under Section 319 CrPC and the requirement of strong and cogent evidence to summon additional accused during trial.
The court held that the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. must be exercised with strong evidence and cannot be invoked after the trial of co-accused has concluded.
The power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is discretionary and should be exercised sparingly based on strong and cogent evidence, and the test for summoning a person is one which is more than prima facie c....
Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence - When strong and cogent evidence comes against a person before the Court and such power should not be exercised in a casual a....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the discretionary and extraordinary nature of the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C., the need for strong and cogent evidence to exercise this power, ....
The court affirmed that the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. must be exercised before the conclusion of trial and sentencing, allowing for the summoning of additional accused based on evidence.
Court under revisional jurisdiction cannot substitute its own views particularly when there was ample evidence available on record before the court below in exercising the jurisdiction as conferred u....
For invoking power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. inter alia includes the principle that only when strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. ....
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
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
