Lack Of Boundaries In Sale Deed Not Fatal To Title If Plot Number & Parent Title Are Sufficiently Identifiable: Calcutta High Court Terror Perception Of Underworld Justifies Delay In Invoking MCOCA; Purely Civil Disputes Can Metamorphose Into Criminal Offence: Bombay High Court Identical Wills Executed By Spouses On Same Day Not Necessarily 'Mutual Wills' Restricting Power Of Alienation: Delhi High Court Written Notice Not Mandatory For Revoking Permission Under Section 41 Presidency Small Cause Courts Act: Gujarat High Court Wife Cannot Maintain Complaint Against Husband Under Senior Citizens Act; Not Intended For Spousal Disputes: Karnataka High Court Mere Presence At Scene Or Facilitation Without Intent To Aid Crime Does Not Amount To Abetment: Delhi High Court Offences Under IT Act Punishable With 3 Years Imprisonment Are Bailable Under Section 77B: Kerala High Court Grants Pre-Arrest Bail In KCA Data Theft Case Premature Release Can't Be Denied Citing Section 435 CrPC If Sentence Under Central Act Is Already Served: Madras High Court Suppression Of Higher Qualification To Secure Job Reserved For Lower Education Is Foundational Fraud, Sympathy Has No Role: Supreme Court MBBS Admissions | Candidate Using NIOS Marks To Meet 50% Eligibility Cannot Claim State Govt School Quota: Orissa High Court High Court Cannot Exercise Article 227 Power To Strike Off Plaint When Remedy Under Order VII Rule 11 CPC Exists: Madras High Court Section 69 IEA | Onus On Propounder To Lead Secondary Evidence & Remove Suspicious Circumstances If Attesting Witnesses Are Dead: Telangana High Court

Powers U/S 319 Cr.P.C Should be used in Cautiously - SC

07 May 2024 8:19 AM

By: Admin


The Supreme Court emphasised that the power granted to courts by Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code is a discretionary and extraordinary power that ought to be used cautiously.

The panel of Justices Ajay Rastogi and CT Ravikumar stated that the important standard that must be used is one that is more than a prima facie case as exercised at the time of charge-framing, but short of satisfaction to the extent that the evidence, if goes unrebutted, will lead to conviction.

In this instance, the trial judge denied the complainant's request to summon a person to testify in a rape case under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code. The complainant said that although she had listed the aforementioned person as an accused in her initial version, the police had not issued a complaint against them since they were working along with the prosecutor. Later, this ruling was overturned by the High Court of Punjab and Haryana, who also approved the application.

Naveen vs State of Haryana

Latest Legal News