The Court ruled that mere presence in FIR and stray statements were insufficient to warrant his inclusion in the charge sheet.
In a significant ruling, the Karnataka High Court has quashed an order that had summoned Suraj Revanna as an additional accused in a case involving multiple charges, including attempt to murder. The judgment, delivered by Justice M. Nagaprasanna, emphasized that the extraordinary power under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code should be exercised sparingly and requires evidence stronger than mere prima facie.
Suraj Revanna was initially named in the FIR relating to an incident on December 3, 2019, where a group allegedly assaulted individuals over political differences. Despite being named, the police, upon investigation, did not include Revanna in the charge sheet, leading to his omission from the list of accused.
During the trial, 13 witnesses were examined, with 11 turning hostile. However, the prosecution moved an application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to summon Revanna based on the testimonies of three witnesses. The trial court allowed this application, leading to Revanna's appeal to the High Court.
The High Court noted that the power under Section 319 is discretionary and requires a higher degree of satisfaction than at the stage of framing charges. The evidence against Revanna, as presented, was deemed insufficient to meet this higher threshold. The Court highlighted that mere naming in the FIR or during the trial, without clear and cogent evidence indicating his involvement, does not justify summoning him as an accused.
The Court's decision underscores the judiciary's cautious approach in exercising powers that can significantly impact an individual's legal standing, reiterating that such powers are not meant to be used in a cavalier manner.
Bottom Line :
Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 Section 319 Power to summon additional accused - Person named in FIR but dropped in charge-sheet cannot be summoned merely on stray or improved statements in trial when such version is contrary to statements recorded during investigation and no strong, cogent and higher degree of evidence emerges - Extraordinary power under Section 319 must be exercised sparingly and only on evidence which, if unrebutted, may lead to conviction.
Statutory provision(s): Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1973.
Suraj Revanna v. State of Karnataka, (Karnataka) : Law Finder Doc id # 2989308
