At the time of inquiry or at the time of the trial of an offence, the evidence collected or recorded discloses that any person other than the accused has committed the said offence, then, the Court has the power to call such other person and join him in the proceedings for the said offence and the same issue was held in the judgement passed by a single bench judge Hon’ble Dr Yogendra Kumar Srivastava, J. In the matter, Mishri Lal V/s State of U.P. and Another [CRIMINAL REVISION No. – 3260 of 202] dealt with an issue mentioned above.
The present criminal revision has been filed seeking to set aside the judgement and order dated 17.11.2021 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 1, Mainpuri in Session Trial No. 316 of 2014 (State vs. Anoj Kumar), under Sections 307, 504 I.P.C., Police Station-Kishni, District-Mainpuri, arising out of Case Crime No. 266 of 2014, on the application of the opposite party no.2 filed under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 19731. As regards the degree of satisfaction required for invoking the powers under Section 319 of the Code, it was held that the test that has to be applied is one which is more than prima facie case as exercised at the time of framing of charge, but short of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence, if goes unrebutted, would lead to conviction
The power to proceed against persons named in FIR with specific allegations against them, but not charge-sheeted, was reiterated in Rajesh and others Vs. The state of Haryana,4 and it was held that persons named in the FIR but not implicated in charge sheet can be summoned to face trial, provided during the trial some evidence surfaces against the proposed accused. The FIR version as also the evidence before the trial judge being indicative of the complicity of the revisionist, though not arraigned as an accused in the charge-sheet, it was open to the trial court to form a view that the revisionist is tried together with the other accused, and for the said purpose summon the revisionist in the exercise of powers under Section 319 of the Code.
The court perused the facts and arguments presented in the case The power under Section 319 of the Code to summon even those persons who are not named in the charge-sheet to appear and face trial, being unquestionable and the object of the provision being not to allow a person who deserves to be tried to go scotfree by being not arraigned in the trial in spite of the possibility of his complicity which can be gathered from the evidence during the course of the trial, the order passed under Section 319 of the Code summoning the revisionist does not contain any material error so as to warrant inference.
Judgment reviewed by Sakshi Mishra