No straitjacket formula can and should be laid with respect to conditions precedent for arriving at such an opinion.-SC

An FIR No.477 dated 27.07.2016 was registered at Police Station Assandhon the basis of the statement of one Rann Singh, regarding the death of his son Amarjit Singh and the injuries suffered by the present appellant - Manjeet Singh. A cross-case was also registered at the behest of Sartaj Singh, the accused in the FIR which was recorded against him. Case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the trial begin in both the cases namely arising out of FIR No.477 dated 27.07.2016 and the cross case. Complainant was cross-examined partly and during the cross-examination, an application under Section 319 CrPC was given on behalf of the complainant for summoning Sukhpal Singh, Tejpal Singh,.Parab Sharan and Preet Samrat as additional accused. On the basis of the evidence recorded the Learned trial Court after considering the statements of Sartaj Singh and other eye witnesses and the material on record allowed the application under Section 319 CrPC vide order dated 21.04.2018 and directed to issue summons against Palwinder Singh, Satkar Singh, Rajwant Singh and Sukhdeep Singh. What is under challenge in the present appeal is the impugned judgment and order passed by the High Court dismissing the revision application preferred by the appellant (the complainant) and refusing to summon the private respondents (the respondents) as additional accused. Section 319 CrPC is an enabling provision empowering the court to take appropriate steps for proceeding against any person not accused for also having committed the offence under trial. It will be inappropriate to deny the existence of such powers with the courts in our criminal justice system where it is not uncommon that the real accused, at times, get away by manipulating the investigating and/or prosecuting agency. Section 319 CrPC provides that a Magistrate/court can decide whether powers under Section 319 are to be exercised or not on the basis of material collected during an investigation. (xii) it is only such evidence as appears in examination-in-chief that can be taken into account by the court to decide whether the Magistrate or court can proceed against other person(s) under the said section. Section 319 CrPC allows a court to proceed against another person who is not facing trial. The prerequisite for the exercise of this power is similar to the prima facie view which the Magistrate must come to in order to take cognizance of the offence. No straitjacket formula can and should be laid with respect to conditions precedent for arriving at such an opinion. 

Appeal is allowed accordingly.

August 24, 2021 

MANJEET SINGH  Versus STATE OF HARYANA & ORS