Allow Cookies!
By using our website, you agree to the use of cookies
The Supreme Court passed a landmark judgement by upholding a trial court order under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Section319 CRPC mentions about summoning the accused even if the person was discharged by it earlier.
The bench comprising Justice NV Ramana and Justice Mohan M Shantanagoudar seconded with the trial court view which said that on the face of it (prima facie) material evidence is sufficient in order to proceed against the accused for the offence which appears to have been committed.
It is important to note that seven persons, including Deepu @ Deepak, were accused of the offence of murder and robbery. Ignoring the supplementary chargesheet the trial court had discharged Deepu and four others. Supreme Court had said that there was no use of recalling the orders of discharge. The prosecution filed an application under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure during the trial of the two other accused. In order to satisfy the element of the application the trial court has given greater significance to supplementary charge sheet ,Test Identification Parade, Forensic Science Laboratory report and statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, as well as depositions of witnesses.
It said that-
“Since, at an earlier point of time the supplementary chargesheet was ignored by the Trial Court while discharging the appellant, there is no bar to proceed against him under Section 319 Cr.P.C. based on the supplementary charge-sheet, that too when sufficient material is brought on record against him during the course of trial.The supplementary chargesheet shows that the identification parade was held, wherein the appellant was identified by the witnesses as one of the accused who participated in the incident of murder. The combined effect of the FSL reports as well as the as well as the statements of witnesses recorded under Section 161 of the Cr.P.C. as found in the supplementary charge-sheet and depositions of PW5 (Sreshtha), PW6 (Mukul Gupta), PW7 (Shyam Bihari), PW8 (Rajaram) and PW12 (N. K. Upadhyaya) fully justifies the orders of the Trial Court and the High Court under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. The Courts on facts have correctly found that the material is sufficient, prima facie, to proceed against the appellant for the offence which he appears to committed, and we concur with their decision.”
86540
103860
630
114
59824