Back
RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA
Usha Devi – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. court's initial considerations. (Para 1 , 2) |
| 2. factual background of the case. (Para 3 , 4) |
| 3. arguments presented by the appellant relating to evidentiary issues. (Para 5 , 6) |
| 4. arguments for allowing application under section 319 cr.p.c. (Para 7 , 8) |
| 5. arguments against allowing application under section 319 cr.p.c. (Para 9) |
| 6. court's observations on the evidence standard under section 319. (Para 10) |
| 7. explanation of section 319 cr.p.c. and couple of rulings. (Para 11 , 12) |
| 8. final judgment and remanding action of the high court. (Para 13) |
| 9. conclusion and direction for trial court. (Para 14 , 15) |
JUDGMENT :
RAM MANOHAR NARAYAN MISHRA, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist, learned AGA for the State and perused the material placed on record.
2. Notice has been served on respondent Nos. 2 and 3 but none appeared on their behalf to contest the criminal revision.
3. Instant criminal revision has been preferred against the judgement and order dated 20.5.2023, passed by learned Special Judge (POCSO Act)/Additional District and Sessions Judge, Kannauj, in Sessions Trial No. 793 of 2022 ( State vs. Indrapal and others ), arising out of Case Crime NO. 305 of 2022
The court emphasized that under Section 319 Cr.P.C., sufficient evidence is required to summon additional accused, balancing the duty to ensure justice with the need for a higher standard of proof.
The court held that the trial court improperly dismissed the application to summon additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. without adequate assessment of witness evidence, necessitating reevalua....
The court emphasized that a prospective accused can only be summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. if strong and cogent evidence emerges, not merely based on allegations or inconsistencies in witness sta....
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 discretionary and extraordinary nature of the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C., requiring strong and cogent evidence to summon accused persons not named in the charge-sheet.
The court ruled that strong evidence is required to summon additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C., emphasizing the need for consistency in the complainant's statements.
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.
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
