Kiran Bala v. State Of Punjab And Others
"#$# %& '
( )*)$ +
& ,- ./ .
.
! "
###
. + 0-1& $
&
'
() )* +)(, - .
/ - &
0
1 2/3 4*
)5 (( +)(6
7+7 7+5 8
74 / -
&
8 %
7(, - - %
!!
+7
! 8
(9 )6 +)+7 % .
&
%
+
!88
! :
: (7 () +)(6
% 6))
+7 8
8 8 %
!% ;
!
% 8
! % !
&
8 8
+ 7 !
& % 8 8 % !
% %
8 8 8 %8 % < !%!
! 8 &
!
% =! / % 3 +98
7+7 / - 8 !
:
>
! ' %
?:% %3 ( ! 8
7+5 (49(4, / -8
2/8 !%
/
8
$ % 8
!
! 8
! %
$ +78
!
8 & !3 +
2
! !
=! !
@:7 &
@:4! 8 8 :8
7(, - - !!
' 3 + 7 $ 8 ! .
/ -%!
() )* +)(,8 !
!
- .
&
(9 )6 +)+7 /
%
! %
88
-
8
! +7
!
$ %8
%!
!
%
-
!!
%
%
!
8 / !
+7 /
8
+ 8 8
!
/ 8
% ! : & 8
<
!
+7
!!
8 % 5.
Learned State counsel has chosen not to address any argument in the matter.
6.
Due deliberations have been given to the contentions as raised above.
7.
Section 319 of Cr.P.C. empowers the Court to add any person, not being the accused before it, but against whom there appears during trial sufficient evidence indicating his involvement in the offence, as an accused and direct him to be tried along with other accused. The principle of law with reference to exercise of jurisdiction under this Section has been well settled by the Constitution Bench of Hon'ble Superme Court in a celebrated pronouncement cited as 'Hardeep Singh and others Vs. State of Punjab and others, (2014) 3 SCC 92', wherein it was observed that the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is discretionary and an extraordinary power. It has to be exercised sparingly and only in those cases where the circumstances of the case so warrants.
It is not to be exercised because the Magistrate or the Sessions Judge is of the opinion that some other person may also be guilty of committing that offence. Only where strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the material placed before the Court that such power should be exercised and not in a casual and cavalier manner. It was also observed that though only a prima facie case is to be established from the evidence led before the Court, not necessarily tested on the anvil of cross examination, it requires much strong evidence than mere probability of his complicity. The test that has to be applied is one which is more than prima facie case as has been established at the time of framing of charge, but short of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence, if goes unrebutted, would lead to conviction.
2 from exercising power under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. 7. Reference can also be made to authority cited as Sagar Vs. State of UP and another, (2022) 6 SCC 389, wherein the Apex Court observed as under:- " The Constitution Bench has given a caution that power under Section 319 of the Code is a discretionary and extraordinary power which should be exercised sparingly and only in those cases where the circumstances of the case so warrant and the crucial test as notice above has to be applied is one which is more that prima facie case as exercised at the time of framing of charge, but short of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence, if goes unrebutted, would lead to conviction...." ; % 8
!
- ! - !!
!
3
+ 7 8 !
2/
8
8
!
8
;
!
%
!
8 8 % ! ! $
!
@:7 & @:4! 8
!
!
:8
@:7 &
%
3 +:
8
&
!
3 7:&
;
@:4!
3
%
3 +: !%
&
& &
$
(*( - - %
%% +7 $ %
3 +7 !
%
$
% 3 + 8% A %
%
$ %
+7 $
-
8
!
!
! +7 !!
+7 $
8 8 '
8
8 !
!
!
=
!
/
-
! =
7(, - - 8
= % %
%
!!
- 8 ! !
8
%>
- ' %
!
8 - .
% -
%
8
%
!
! !
!
%
4
. 5
'
( )*)$ +