In Criminal Appeal No. 3172 of 2023 -SC- Supreme Court clarifies higher degree of satisfaction required to summon additional accused under Section 319 of Cr.P.C.
Justice Abhay S. Oka & Justice Pankaj Mithal [19-10-2023]

Read Order: Aarif & Ors V. The State of Rajasthan & Anr

Chahat Varma

New Delhi, October 26, 2023: In a recent judgment, the Supreme Court has quashed the summoning of additional accused in a murder case due to lack of prima facie evidence. The Court observed that under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.), the degree of satisfaction required to summon additional accused is much stricter than the test for a prima facie case when taking cognizance of an offense.

In the matter at hand, a pending prosecution involved multiple offenses under the Indian Penal Code, including Sections 148, 341, 323, and 302, read with Section 149. On June 8, 2022, the Additional Sessions Judge invoked the authority granted by Section 319 Cr.P.C.. This action led to the inclusion of the appellants as accused individuals, even though they were not originally mentioned in the charge sheet. In response to this development, the appellants decided to challenge the Additional Sessions Judge's decision by filing a revision application before the Rajasthan High Court. However, the High Court, through an impugned order, dismissed the revision application.

In summary, an incident occurred where the complainant, along with his parents, was near heaps of bricks. During this time, Shahid, Javed (appellants), and others assaulted the complainant's father with iron rods, resulting in his death and injuries to the mother. Initially, a charge sheet was filed against five accused individuals, excluding the present appellants. Later, the Trial Court invoked its powers under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. based on the evidence of PW-1 Manja (the deceased's widow) and added the appellants as accused. In August 2018, the High Court set aside this order, indicating that evidence from all eyewitnesses should have been recorded before applying Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. The case was sent back to the Trial Court for reassessment. Subsequently, on June 8, 2022, the Trial Court, after recording evidence from eyewitnesses, once again included the appellants under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. This decision was confirmed by the High Court in a judgment dated April 4, 2023.

The division bench of Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice Pankaj Mithal observed that the High Court's order in the revision petition required the recording of evidence from other prosecution witnesses, specifically eyewitnesses, before considering the application under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C.

Referring to Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab [LQ/SC/2014/37], the bench noted that when taking cognizance, the court must establish a prima facie case to proceed against the accused. However, under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., while the test for a prima facie case remains the same, the level of satisfaction required is significantly higher.

In the present case, the bench observed that regarding the evidence of PW-1, it was noted that despite having earlier opportunities, the witness's statement was recorded quite late. The witness herself acknowledged that a police constable visited her at 4 a.m. while she was at the hospital where the deceased was being treated, but she did not disclose any information about the incident. Notably, she had spent the entire night at the hospital, where a police outpost was present, yet she remained silent.

Furthermore, the bench observed that PW-5, admitted during cross-examination that he had not personally witnessed the incident, making him not an eyewitness. PW-6, claimed to have seen the incident from a distance and had gone to the hospital where the deceased was taken but did not report the incident to the police, even though he was related to the deceased. The respondents also relied on the testimony of PW-7, but his statement was recorded three weeks after the incident. Thus, the bench opined that the evidence provided by these witnesses fell short of meeting the standards of a prima facie case.

Therefore, the court allowed the appeal and overturned the challenged orders dated 8th June 2022 and 04th April 2023. Consequently, the application under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. was dismissed.