LexKALLU NAT ALIAS MAYANK KUMAR NAGAR versus STATE OF U.P. AND ANR.
Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this caseJudgment (excerpt)
[2025] 8 S.C.R. 611 : 2025 INSC 930 Kallu Nat Alias Mayank Kumar Nagar v. State of U.P. and Anr. (Special Leave Petition (Criminal) No. 10010 of 2025) 05 August 2025 [J.B. Pardiwala* and R. Mahadevan, JJ.] Issue for Consideration Whether the Court of Session, without itself recording evidence, can summon a person to stand trial in exercise of its powers u/s.193, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 as an accused (along with others committed to it by a Magistrate) on the basis of materials in the form of statements and other documents as contained in the final report of the investigating officer u/s.173, CrPC independently of the provisions of s.319 of the said Code. Headnotes† Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – Chapter XIV – s.193 – Cognizance of offences by Courts of Session – “cognizance”; “taking cognizance” – Whether the Court of Session, without itself recording evidence, can summon a person to stand trial in exercise of its powers u/s.193 as an accused (along with others committed to it by a Magistrate) on the basis of materials in the form of statements and other documents as contained in the final report of the investigating officer u/s.173 independently of the provisions of s.319: Held: The Court of Session has power u/s.193 to summon a person as accused to stand trial, even if he has not been charge- sheeted by the police and whose complicity in the crime appears in the evidence available on record – Both u/ss.209 and 193, CrPC respectively, commitment is of, the “case” and not of the “accused” as distinguished from s.193(3) and s.207A respectively of the old Code where commitment was of the “accused” and not the “case” – For committing a case there must be an offence and involvement of a person who committed the same – Even though the case is committed yet cognizance taken is of the offence and not the offender – Once the case in respect of the offence qua the * Author 612 [2025] 8 S.C.R. Supreme Court Reports accused, who are before the Court, is committed and cognizance is taken, the embargo u/s.193 regarding taking cognizance only by committal goes – Summoning additional persons will then be regarded as incidental to the cognizance already taken on committal and as, a part, of, the normal process that follows – A fresh committal of such person is not necessary – Further, s.319(4)(b) enacts a deeming provision in that behalf dispensing with the formal committal order by providing that the person added will be deemed to have been an accused even when cognizance was taken first – Proceedings could be instituted and cognizance taken also against persons not known at that time – Once the Court takes cognizance of the offence (not of the offender), it becomes the Court’s duty to find out the real offenders and if it comes to the conclusion that besides the persons put up for trial by the police some others are also involved in the commission of the crime, it is the Court’s duty to summon them to stand trial along with those already named, since summoning them would only be part of the process of taking cognizance – Constitution Bench judgment in Dharam Pal case, explained. [Paras 90, 103] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 – s.193 – Cognizance of offences by Courts of Session – Rape and murder of Respondent No.2-complainant’s wife – Crime Branch gave clean chit to the petitioner herein and the charge-sheet was filed only against the co-accused – Case came to be committed u/s.209, CrPC being exclusively triable by the Court of Session – Respondent No.2 filed application u/s.193 seeking to summon the petitioner as an accused – Application allowed by trial court – Order affirmed by High Court – Correctness: Held: No error in the impugned order – Upon the committal by the Magistrate, the Court of Sessions is empowered to take cognizance of the whole of the incident constituting the offence – The Court of Sessions is thus invested with the complete jurisdiction to summon any individual accused of the crime – The Court of Session takes cognizance of the case or the offence as a whole and, therefore, is entitled to summon anyone who, on the material before it, appears to be guilty of such offence to stand trial before it – The whole of the incident constituting the offence is to be taken cognizance of by the Court of Session on commitment and not that every individual offender must be so committed or that in case it is not so done then the Court of Session
Excerpt shown. Read the full judgment & AI analysis in Lexace.