Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 7 of 7 (0.37 seconds)Jaipur Shahar Hindu Vikas Samiti ... vs State Of Rajasthan Tr.Chief Sec.& Ors on 17 April, 2014
"95. At the time of taking cognizance, the court has
to see whether a prima facie case is made out to
proceed against the accused. Under Section 319 CrPC,
though the test of prima facie case is the same, the
degree of satisfaction that is required is much stricter.
A two-Judge Bench of this Court in Vikas v. State of
Rajasthan, held that on the objective satisfaction of
the court a person may be "arrested" or "summoned",
as the circumstances of the case may require, if it
appears from the evidence that any such person not
being the accused has committed an offence for which
such person could be tried together with the already
arraigned accused persons.
The Indian Penal Code, 1860
Hardeep Singh vs State Of Punjab & Ors on 10 January, 2014
8 Cri.Rev.Appln.133-18.odt
It has been clearly laid down in the case of S.
Mohammed referring to the observations in the case of
Hardeep Singh (supra) that the powers under Section
319 of the Cr.P.C. can be exercised by the Trial Court at
any stage during the trial when it finds that there is
some evidence against the person to be arrayed and he
appears to be guilty of the offence. The word 'evidence'
has also been interpreted to mean the material that is
brought before the Court during the trial. In so far as
the material collected by the Investigating Officer at the
stage of inquiry, it can be utilized to corroborate and
support such an evidence. It has been ultimately
concluded in paragraph No.35 in the case of S.
Mohammed as under :
Section 401 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973
Section 161 in The Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 [Entire Act]
1