JUHRU & ORS versus KARIM & ANR.

Citation: [2023] 2 S.C.R. 519 · Decided: 21-02-2023 · Supreme Court of India · Bench: SURYA KANT · Disposal: Case Partly allowed
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case
Judgment (excerpt)

A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
519
   [2023] 2 S.C.R. 519
519
JUHRU & ORS.
v.
KARIM & ANR.
(Criminal Appeal No.549 of 2023)
FEBRUARY 21, 2023
[SURYA KANT AND J.K. MAHESHWARI, JJ.]
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s. 319 – Additional
accused – Summoning of –Appeal filed by the father-in-
law(appellant no.1), sister-in-law(appellant no.2), and brother-in-
law(appellant no.3) of the deceased against the High Court
judgment wherein the High Court summoned them u/s 319 of the
CrPC, 1973 as additional accused – Earlier, respondent no. 1
(brother of the deceased woman) had filed an FIR u/s 304B, 498A,
406, 323 and 34 IPC against the husband of the deceased, the
mother-in-law of the deceased, and the abovementioned appellants
– The investigating agency did not find any incriminating material
against the appellants, and a challan was filed only against the
husband and the mother-in-law of the deceased – Thereafter,
respondent no. 1 filed an application u/s 319 Cr.P.C. before trial
Court to summon the appellants as additional accused – Trial Court
dismissed the said application – Respondent no. 1 approached the
High Court – The High Court summoned the appellants to face trial
– Discontented with their summoning, the appellants filed appeal
before the Supreme Court – Held: Power of summoning u/s. 319
Cr.P.C. is not to be exercised routinely and the existence of more
than a prima facie case is sine qua non to summon an additional
accused – The procedural safeguard can be that ordinarily the
summoning of a person at the very threshold of the trial may be
discouraged and the trial Court must evaluate the evidence against
the persons sought to be summoned – In absence of any credible
evidence, the power u/s.319 Cr.P.C. ought not to be invoked – In
the instant case, the record reveals that appellant no.1 had asked
respondent no.1 to spend 20 lakhs on marriage – Therefore, High
Court summoning appellant no.1 satisfies the ingredients of s.319
Cr.P.C. – However, no credible evidence to connect the death of
deceased with appellant nos.2 and 3.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
520
SUPREME COURT REPORTS
[2023] 2 S.C.R.
Partly allowing the appeal, the Court
Held: 1. It is, thus, manifested from a conjoint reading of
the cited decisions that power of summoning under Section 319
Cr.P.C. is not to be exercised routinely and the existence of more
than a prima facie case is sine qua non to summon an additional
accused. This Court may add that with a view to prevent the
frequent misuse of power to summon additional accused under
Section 319 Cr.P.C., and in conformity with the binding judicial
dictums referred to above, the procedural safeguard can be that
ordinarily the summoning of a person at the very threshold of the
trial may be discouraged and the trial court must evaluate the
evidence against the persons sought to be summoned and then
adjudge whether such material is, more or less, carry the same
weightage and value as has been testified against those who are
already facing trial. In the absence of any credible evidence, the
power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. ought not to be invoked. [Para
17][525-H; 526-A-C]
Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 3 SCC 92 :
2014 (2 )  SCR 1; Sukhpal Singh Khaira v. The State
of Punjab (2023) 1 SCC 289 – relied on.
Case Law Reference
(2014) 2 SCR 1
relied on
Para 13, 15
(2023) 1 SCC 289
relied on
Para 14, 16
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION : Criminal Appeal
No.549 of 2023.
From the Judgment and Order dated 27.01.2020 of the High Court
of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh in CRM-M No.40507 of 2018.
S. K. Verma, Atul Kumar, Abhimanyu Sharma, Ms. Deepali,
Janmayjai Verma, Advs. for the Appellants.
Deepkaran Dalal, Raunaq Dalal, Ashish Jhamb, Arun Kumar, Dr.
Monika Gusain, Advs. for the Respondents.
The Judgment of the Court was delivered by
SURYA KANT, J.
Leave Granted.
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
521
2. The instant Criminal Appeal originates from a judgment dated
27.01.2020 whereby the High Court of Punjab and Haryana at Chandigarh
(in short ‘High Court’), while setting aside the order dated 12.07.2018
passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Nuh, has ordered the summoning
of the Appellants under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 (hereinafter ‘Cr.P.C.’) as additional accused.
A. FACTS
3. Briefly stated the facts are that FIR No. 270 dated 09.07.2017
was registered at Police Station Tauru, District Nuh under Sections 304B,
498A, 406, 323 and 34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860 (hereinafter ‘IPC’)
on the statement of Karim - Respondent N
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.