HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
ABDUL SHAHID
Surendra Kumar Sharma – Appellant
Versus
State of U.P. – Respondent
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. factual basis surrounding the marriage and allegations. (Para 2 , 3 , 4 , 5) |
| 2. details about the evidence and postmortem findings. (Para 6) |
| 3. arguments regarding the trial court's order. (Para 7 , 8 , 9) |
| 4. opposite party’s response to the revision petition. (Para 11 , 12 , 13) |
| 5. discretionary power under section 319 cr.p.c. (Para 14 , 15 , 16) |
| 6. criteria for invoking section 319 cr.p.c. (Para 17 , 18 , 19 , 20 , 21) |
| 7. standards for summoning additional accused. (Para 22 , 23 , 24 , 25) |
| 8. case law regarding vague allegations against co-accused. (Para 26 , 27 , 28) |
| 9. proper application of legal principles in the case. (Para 29 , 30 , 31) |
| 10. final decision regarding the revision petition. (Para 34 , 36) |
JUDGMENT :
ABDUL SHAHID, J.
1. Heard Sri Manish Tiwari, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Hitesh Pachori, learned counsel for the revisionists and Sri K.K. Dwivedi, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2, who has filed his vakalatnama. The same is taken on record.
2. The instant criminal revision has been preferred being aggrieved by the impugned order dated 31.10.2025, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 17, Agra (State Vs. Jitendra Gond
State of Punjab Vs.Davinder Pal Singh Bhullar
Kalbharti Advertising Vs. Hemant Vimalnath Narchania
Badrinath Vs. Government of Tamil Nadu
Mangal Prasad Tamoli Vs. Narvadeshwar Mishra
Seth Ganga Dhar Vs. Shankar Lal and others
Sanju alias Sanjay Singh Sengar Vs. State of M.P.
State of Kerala and others Vs. S. Unnikrishnan Nair and others
State of West Bengal Vs. Indrajit Kundu and another
S Mohammed Ispahani V. Yogendra Chandak and others
Y. Saraba Reddy V. Puthur Rami Reddy and another
Lok Ram V. Nihal Singh and another
Hardeep Singh Vs State of Punjab
Pyare Lal Bhargava v. The State of Rajasthan
Ram Singh & Ors. v. Ram Niwas & Anr.
Sarabjit Singh & Anr. v. State of Punjab & Anr.
Hardeep Singh Vs. State of Punjab and others
Brijendra Singh and others Vs. State of Rajasthan
Vague and general allegations without specific evidence against accused fail to sustain prosecution under IPC for dowry-related offenses.
Dowry Death - Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence - It is true that summoning of an accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. cannot be resorted to in a cavalier or casua....
(1) While invoking power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. trial court should consider statements of witnesses adduced before it and it should not place reliance upon material available in charge-sheet or ca....
The court reiterated the application of Section 319 Cr.P.C. must rely on evidence recorded during trial, requiring more than a prima facie case for summoning additional accused.
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 powers under Section 319 CrPC are discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly and not in a casual and cavalier manner for summoning a person as an additional accused. There must be....
Section 319 Cr.P.C is an enabling provision empowering Court to take appropriate steps for proceeding against any person(s) not being an accused at any stage during trial i.e., before conclusion of t....
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.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.