Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.319 – Summons purporting to invoke power u/s.319 CrPC – Challenge to – Murder – Deposition of second respondent that her husband (deceased) was murdered by his employer (the appellant) with the help of his friends – Deceased was the driver of appellant – Application on behalf of prosecution invoking s.319 CrPC – Sessions Judge held that power u/s.319 CrPC has to be invoked and ordered to summon the appellant – Order upheld by High Court – Held: The statement of law as regards the standards fixed for invoking power u/s.319 CrPC is contained in paragraphs 105 and 106 of the Constitution Bench decision of Supreme Court in Hardeep Singh case – The test as laid down in Hardeep Singh case for invoking power u/s.319 CrPC inter alia includes the principle that only when strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence, the power u/s.319 Cr.P.C. should be exercised – The power cannot be exercised in a casual and cavalier manner – The test to be applied is one which is more than prima facie case which is applied at the time of framing of charges – It will all depend upon the evidence which is tendered in a given case as to whether there is a strong ground within the meaning of paragraph 105 of Hardeep Singh case – Order of the Sessions Judge issuing summons, set aside – Sessions Judge to re-consider the matter in light of the principles enunciated in Hardeep Singh case.
Allowing the appeal, the Court
HELD:1. While the Supreme Court has approved of relying upon deposition which has not suffered cross examination for the purpose of invoking Section 319 Cr.P.C., it is relevant to note the standards which have been fixed by this Court for invoking the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The statement of law in this regard is contained in paragraphs 105 and 106 of Hardeep Singh case. [Para 7][222-E-F]
2.1. The respondents, no doubt, point out that the deposition of the second respondent as given by her, would suffice in law for the Court to invoke the power under Section
319 Cr.P.C., however, the matter must be reconsidered.[Para 8] [223-D]
2.2. The test as laid down by the Constitution Bench of this Court in Hardeep Singh case 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. should be exercised. The power cannot be exercised in a casual and cavalier manner. The test to be applied, as laid down by this Court, is one which is more than prima facie case which is applied at the time of framing of charges. It will all depend upon the evidence which is tendered in a given case as to whether there is a strong ground within the meaning of paragraph 105 of Hardeep Singh case. [Paras 10, 11][223-E-G]
3. The order passed by the Sessions Judge issuing summons, is set aside. The Sessions Judge is directed to consider the matter afresh in the light of the principles which have been clearly enunciated by this Court in Hardeep Singh case. [Paras 12, 13][223-H; 224-A-B]
Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Others (2014)
3 SCC 92 : [2014] 2 SCR 1 – followed.
Labhuji Amratji Thakor and Others v. State of Gujarat and Another AIR 2019 SC 734 : [2018] 13 SCR 822 – referred to.
As published in the Supreme Court Reports, Supreme Court of India. Text from the Indian Supreme Court Judgments open data set (Dattam Labs), CC BY 4.0.
This page is for informational and research purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Consult a qualified advocate for advice specific to your situation.