Complicity Not Established, Invocation of Section 319 Cr.P.C. Questioned– High Court Quashes Summoning Orders

In a significant ruling, the High Court of Punjab & Haryana, presided over by Hon'ble Mr. Justice Harpreet Singh Brar, allowed a petition challenging the summoning of the petitioners as additional accused in a criminal case. The Court underscored the absence of sufficient material to establish their complicity, leading to the quashing of the summoning orders.

Legal Point of the Judgment: The core issue was the invocation of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) to summon the petitioners, who were not named in the FIR or in the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C., as additional accused. The Court examined whether the trial and revisional courts erred in invoking Section 319 Cr.P.C. without substantial material.

Facts and Issues: The petitioners were summoned to face trial in FIR No. 63 of 2010, registered for offenses under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, and 120-B of the Indian Penal Code (IPC), at Police Station Ajnala. The crux of the petitioners' argument was the lack of material evidence indicating their involvement in the alleged offenses.

Court’s Assessment: Justice Brar, after perusing the records and hearing the arguments, observed that there was no material on record to indicate the petitioners' involvement. The Court noted that the petitioners were neither named in the FIR nor in column No. 2 of the final report under Section 173 Cr.P.C. The Court cited the landmark judgment in Hardeep Singh vs. State of Punjab, emphasizing the need for more than prima facie evidence at the time of framing of charge.

Legal Principles and Law: The judgment reasserted the principles laid down in the precedents of Sarabjit Singh vs. State of Punjab and Juhru and others Vs. Karim and another. The Court emphasized the careful exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C., requiring credible evidence before summoning additional accused.

Decision of Judgment: The High Court allowed the petition, quashing the orders dated February 18, 2016, and July 14, 2017, which had summoned the petitioners as additional accused. The Court held that in the absence of credible material evidence against the petitioners, the invocation of Section 319 Cr.P.C. was unjustified.

Kashmir Singh and others vs. State of Punjab and another

Date of Decision: February 01, 2024