Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

21. Subsequently in Jogendra yadav (Supra), Court considered the issue as to whether a non-charge sheeted accused summoned under section 319 Cr.P.C. can claim discharge under section 227 Cr.P.C. Court referred to observations contained in paragraphs 105 and 106 of the Constitution Bench judgement in Hardeep Singh's case in paragraph 10 of the judgement and delineated the rights of an accused summoned under section 319 Cr.P.C. to claim discharge in paragraph-13 of the judgement, which reads as under:

25. In Dev Wati (Supra), Court considered the correctness of an order passed by the High Court, whereby it upheld the order passed by Sessions Court allowing an application under section 319 Cr.P.C. in a case under Sections- 302/34 I.P.C. Court took notice of the Constitution Bench judgement in Hardeep Singh's case. Court referred to the words "appeal" and 'proved' as interpreted by Constitution Bench, with reference to Section 319 Cr.P.C. and on basis thereof examined the veracity of order impugned. Following was determined in paragraphs- 8 and 9 of the judgement:

35. In Manjeet Singh (Supra), Court was considering the correctness of an order passed by High Court dismissing the revision preferred against an order passed by Sessions Judge allowing the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. filed in a case under Sections 363, 366, 376 IPC and Sections 3/4 Protection of Children From Sexual Offences, (POCSO) Act, 2012 Court again examined the issue relating to parameters for exercise of jurisdiction under section 319 Cr.P.C. Court took notice of the constitution Bench judgement in Hardeep Singh (Supra) and S. Mohammed Ispahani (Supra) and on basis of ratio laid down therein evolved the ambit and scope of powers of Court under section 319 Cr.P.C. in paragraphs 34 of judgement. Having done so, Court examined the testimony of P.W.1 Manjeet who is an injured witness and on basis thereof tested the veracity of orders passed by High Court as well as trial court whereby summoning of non charge sheeted accused was declined. Court upon evaluation of evidence on record disagreed with the view taken by High Court as well as trial court. Following disagreement was expressed by court in paragraphs 34, 35, 36, 37 and 38 of the judgement:

38. The ambit and scope of powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. now stands crystalized by Supreme Court in paragraph- 34 of the judgement in Manjeet Singh (supra).

39. The summoning of a non charge-sheeted accused in exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. cannot be done in a "casual and cavalier manner". Power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is "an extraordinary discretionary power which should be exercised sparingly". Vide paragraphs- 34 and 36 of the judgement in S. Mohammed Ispahani (supra) and paragraph- 105 of the Constitution Bench judgement in Hardeep Singh (supra).