LexJOGENDRA YADAV & ORS. versus STATE OF BIHAR &ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2015) 9 S.C.R. 69 JOGENDRAYADAV & ORS. v. STATE OF BIHAR &ANR. (Criminal Appeal No. 343 of2012) JULY 15, 2015 [S.A. BOBDE AND R.K. AGRAWAL, JJ.] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973: ss. 319, 227 - Nature and power under- Discussed. ss. 319, 227 - Discharge uls.227 in case of person added as accused u/s.319-Permissibility- Held: A person who is added as accused uls. 319 is not entitled to the remedy A B c of discharge uls. 227 since it would be contrary to the scheme D and intent of Code - The exercise of the power uls. 319 must be placed on a higher pedestal - The accused summoned u/s.319 are entitled to invoke remedy under law against an illegal or improper exercise of the power uls.319, but cannot have the effect of the order undone by seeking a E discharge uls.227 of the Code. s. 319-Accused since inception and accused added ul s.319- Distinction between. Dismissing the appeal, the Court HELD: 1. A perusal of Section 319, Cr.P.C. shows that a person who is not an accused may be added as F an accused only when it appears from the evidence G that he has committed any offence for which he could be tried together with the accused. The Section says that in such an eventuality, the Court "may proceed against such person" for the offence which he appears to have committed. Section 227 of the Cr.P.C. on the H . 69 70 SUPREME COURT REPORTS [2015] 9 ~.C.R. A other hand, provides that an accused may be discharged if the Judge construes that there is no sufficient ground for the proceedings against him. Both these provisions, in essence, therefore, have the . opposite effect. The power under Section 319 of the B Cr.P.C. results in the summoning and consequent commencement of the proceedings against a person· who was hitherto not an accused and the power under Section 227 of the Cr.P.C., results in termination of proceedings against the person who is an accused. C [Paras 6, 7 and 8] [74-H; 75-A, C, D-E] 2. There is material difference between an accused since inception and accused who has been added as such under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C.An accused since D inception is not necessarily heard before he is added as an accused. However, a person who is added as an accused under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., is necessarily heard before being so added. Often he gets a further hearing if he challenges the summoning order before E the High Court. It seems incongruous and indeed anomalous if the two sections are construed to mean that a person who is added as an accused by the court after considering the evidence against him can avail F remedy of discharge on the ground that there is no sufficient material against him. Moreover, the extraordinary power under Section 319, Cr.P.C., can be exercised only if very strong and cogent evidence occurs against a person from the evidence led before · G the Court. [Para 9] [75-G-H; 76-A-C] 3. A person is added as an accused under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., on the basis of evidence; whereas an accused is discharged under Section 227 of the H Cr.P.C., on a sifting of material collected i.e. "the record JOGENDRA YADAV & ORS. v. STATE OF BIHAR &ANR. 71 of the case and the document submitted herewith" in A order to find out whether or not there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused. In fact, the mandate of Section 228, Cr.P.C., is that the Judge only need be of "opinion that there is ground for presuming that the accused has committed an offence ..... " before framing B a charge. An order for addition of an accused made after considering the evidence cannot be undone by coming to the conclusion that there is no sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused without appreciation of evidence. [Para 11] [77-F; 78-A-B] C Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Ors. (2014) 3 SCC 92: 2014 (2) SCR 1; Ajay Kumar Parmar v. State ofRajasthan (2012) 12 sec 406: 2012 (8) SCR 970; New India Assurance Co. Ltd. v. Nus/i Neville D Wadia and Anr. (2008) 3 sec 279: 2007 (13) SCR 598 - relied on. Case Law Reference 2014 (2) SCR 1 relied on. relied on. relied on. Para 9 E 2012 (8) SCR 970 2007 (13) SCR 598 Para 11 Para 12 CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION·: Criminal Appeal No. 343 of2012 F From the Judgment and Order dated 24.11.2010 of the High Court of Judicature at Patna in Cr. Misc. No. 12193 of 2008 G Sishir Pinaki, Shailendra Kumar, Suryodaya Prakash Tiwari, Amit Pawan for the Appella
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.