{"id":347669,"date":"2025-05-13T16:30:52","date_gmt":"2025-05-13T11:00:52","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=347669"},"modified":"2025-05-13T16:32:27","modified_gmt":"2025-05-13T11:02:27","slug":"high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/","title":{"rendered":"\u2018High Court misapplied S. 319 CrPC by prioritising unproved defence documents over sworn testimony\u2019; Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Supreme Court:<\/span> In an appeal filed by the father of the deceased against the judgment of the Punjab & Haryana High Court, which had set aside an order of the Additional Sessions Judge (‘Trial Court’) summoning the accused to face trial under Section 306<\/a> read with Section 34<\/a> of the Penal Code, 1860<\/a> (‘IPC’), a Division Bench comprising of Vikram Nath*<\/span> and K.V. Viswanathan, JJ. held that, in view of the purpose and scope of Section 319<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’), there was no infirmity in the Trial Court’s decision to summon accused 2.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that not summoning him would have risked a truncated trial and a potential miscarriage of justice. It further held that the High Court, by placing unproven defence documents above sworn testimony, had adopted an approach, inconsistent with both the statutory mandate of Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> and the broader context of a case involving a vulnerable victim. This intervention, the Court noted, effectively prevented the prosecution from testing the alibi and curtailed the Trial Court’s jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, and the High Court’s judgment was set aside. The Trial Court’s order summoning accused 2 to stand trial under Section 306<\/a> IPC<\/a> was restored. The accused was directed to appear before the Trial Court within four weeks and comply with all further directions issued by the court.<\/p>\n

Background<\/h3>\n

On 13-03-2016, an acid attack was allegedly carried out on the deceased by ten individuals, but accused 2 was not named in the FIR. On 10-05-2016, the deceased and his paternal uncle were allegedly confronted by accused 2 and another unidentified individual. They taunted the deceased, suggesting he and his family should feel ashamed for not acting against the acid-attack assailants. Distressed, the deceased returned home, locked himself in a room, and left again around 4:00 p.m. His body was later found on 13-05-2016 near the Hussainpur canal.<\/p>\n

FIR was registered under Section 306<\/a> read with 34<\/a> IPC<\/a>, naming accused 2. During the investigation, accused 2 presented an alibi with evidence, including a parking slip, medical records, and CCTV footage from 10-05-2016. The police accepted this evidence and filed a report, classifying accused 2 as “innocent.” As a result, only the remaining accused were committed.<\/p>\n

However, the Trial Court summoned accused 2 under Section 193<\/a> of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973<\/a> (‘CrPC’). Accused 2 challenged the order in the High Court, which quashed the summons, citing the lack of a committal order for him. The High Court allowed the possibility of invoking Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> if credible evidence surfaced during the trial.<\/p>\n

In March 2022, the father of the deceased testified as witness, describing the confrontation and implicating accused 2. The Public Prosecutor moved to summon him under Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> based on the testimonies. The Trial Court allowed the application, considering the prima facie evidence.<\/p>\n

Accused 2 challenged this in the High Court, claiming that the Trial Court had ignored his alibi and documentary proof. Thereafter, the High Court set aside the summoning order, stating that the evidence presented was insufficient under Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The father of the deceased now contended that the High Court erred in evaluating the evidence prematurely, overlooking direct eyewitness accounts, and disregarding the fact that accused 2’s alibi was untested. He argued that the Trial Court’s decision to summon accused 2 was correct, as the evidence was sufficient for him to stand trial for abetment to suicide.<\/p>\n

Issue<\/h3>\n

Whether the evidence justified the Trial Court’s exercise of power under Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> to summon accused 2, and whether the High Court was right in setting that order aside at the threshold.<\/p>\n

Analysis and Decision<\/h3>\n

The Court examined the scope of Section 319(1)<\/a> of the CrPC<\/a> and clarified that it empowers a criminal court, once it is seized of a matter, to summon any person whose involvement becomes evident from the evidence that emerges during trial. This provision serves as an exception to the general rule that only those named in the charge sheet stand trial. Its purpose is to ensure that no potentially culpable individual is excluded from the proceedings. While the power under Section 319 is extraordinary and must be exercised with caution, it is not subordinate to the findings of the investigation. If the court, based on live evidence, finds a prima facie case stronger than mere suspicion, it is duty-bound to act.<\/p>\n

The Court referred to Hardeep Singh<\/span> v. State of Punjab<\/span>, (2014) 3 SCC 92<\/a>, wherein it was observed that Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> is designed to ensure that every participant in a crime is brought before the Court and its provisions are therefore to be interpreted constructively and purposively, so that the true offender does not slip through procedural gaps.<\/p>\n

The Court opined that the power under Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a> was not to be invoked based on conjecture, but on “evidence” that emerges during trial proceedings. In the present case, the father of the deceased provided a detailed account of the events of 10-05-2016, stating that accused 2, along with others, stopped a car and confronted the deceased. Using strong words in Punjabi, they allegedly taunted him, saying he and his family should drown themselves for not taking action against the acid-attack perpetrators. He also described the immediate emotional toll on the deceased, how he broke down, isolated himself, and eventually left home, never to return alive.<\/p>\n

The Court noted that the primary defence raised by accused 2 rests on a plea of alibi. However, an alibi is a defence in nature, and the burden of proving it lies entirely with the accused. In this case, the documents cited, such as a parking slip, chemist’s receipt, OPD card, and CCTV footage, have not yet been formally proved in court. Until they are subjected to evidentiary scrutiny, they remain unverified and cannot be treated as conclusive. Accepting them at face value at this preliminary stage would disrupt the established course of a criminal trial, effectively requiring the Court to rule on a defence before the prosecution has presented its full case. Even if it was assumed that these documents will eventually be proven, their contents do not decisively counter the prosecution’s case. For instance, the parking slip is timestamped at 6:30 a.m., while the chemist’s receipt and CCTV footage are from 12:09 p.m. The confrontation, however, is alleged to have taken place at 8:30 a.m., a timeframe that still allows for travel from Jagowal to Chandigarh, a distance of approximately ninety kilometres, by private vehicle.<\/p>\n

More significantly, the Court emphasised that abetment to suicide is not necessarily a momentary act. It may consist of a sustained build-up of psychological pressure that ultimately drives a person to take their own life. The law is designed to punish that cumulative pressure, regardless of where or when it manifests.<\/p>\n

The Court said that the High Court, while exercising its powers under Section 482<\/a> CrPC<\/a>, placed undue reliance on the investigation records and downplayed the incident of 10-05-2016 by characterizing it as mere “teasing.” Such a description, the Court noted, fails to capture both the gravity of the words spoken and their psychological impact. If the allegation is true, telling a physically challenged man and his family that they should die, particularly in the immediate aftermath of a brutal acid attack is far from harmless banter. The Court emphasised the need for sensitivity to the social context, where notions of honour and shame can have profound consequences. Ultimately, it clarified that while the offence must be established at trial, the seriousness of the allegation warranted judicial scrutiny.<\/p>\n

The Court concluded that, considering the purpose and scope of Section 319<\/a> CrPC<\/a>, there was no infirmity in the Trial Court’s decision to summon accused 2. On the contrary, failing to summon him would have risked a truncated trial and potential miscarriage of justice. The High Court, by placing unproven defence documents above sworn testimony, adopted an approach inconsistent with both the letter of Section 319 and the context of a case involving a vulnerable victim. Its intervention effectively prevented the prosecution from testing the alibi and curtailed the Trial Court’s statutory jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, and the High Court’s judgment was set aside. The Trial Court’s order summoning accused 2 to stand trial under Section 306<\/a> IPC<\/a>, was restored. Accused 2 was directed to appear before the Trial Court within four weeks and comply with its further directions.<\/p>\n

[Harjinder Singh v. State of Punjab, 2025 SCC OnLine SC 1029<\/a>, decided on 06-05-2025<\/span>]<\/p>\n

*Judgment Authored by: Justice Vikram Nath<\/span><\/strong><\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case:<\/p>\n

For Petitioner(s):<\/span> Mr. G. Balaji, AOR<\/p>\n

For Respondent(s):<\/span> Mr. Siddhant Sharma, AOR, Mr. Chritarth Palli, AOR<\/p>\n

Buy Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973  HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"Code<\/a><\/p>\n

Buy Penal Code, 1860   HERE<\/a><\/h3>\n

\"penal<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

“If the allegations are true, telling a physically challenged man that he and his family should die, and doing so in the immediate aftermath of a grievous acid attack, is not banter. Sensitivity to the social context, where honour and shame weigh heavily, was called for. The offence, no doubt, will have to be established at the trial.”<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":67512,"featured_media":347674,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,9],"tags":[30948,11801,75865,45100,33161,44893,5363,81983,81982],"class_list":["post-347669","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-supremecourt","tag-abetment-to-suicide","tag-high-court","tag-legal-precedent","tag-section-319","tag-section-319-crpc","tag-summoning-order","tag-supreme-court","tag-sworn-testimony","tag-unproved-defence-documents"],"yoast_head":"\nSupreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case, says high court misapplied Section 319 CrPC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Supreme Court restored a summoning order in an abetment to suicide case, ruling that the High Court misapplied Section 319 CrPC by prioritizing unproved defence documents over sworn testimony.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"\u2018High Court misapplied S. 319 CrPC by prioritising unproved defence documents over sworn testimony\u2019; Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Supreme Court restored a summoning order in an abetment to suicide case, ruling that the High Court misapplied Section 319 CrPC by prioritizing unproved defence documents over sworn testimony.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-05-13T11:00:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-05-13T11:02:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Section-319-CrPC.jpeg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"886\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"590\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"\u2018High Court misapplied S. 319 CrPC by prioritising unproved defence documents over sworn testimony\u2019; Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Apoorva\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"7 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/\",\"name\":\"Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case, says high court misapplied Section 319 CrPC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Section-319-CrPC.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-05-13T11:00:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-05-13T11:02:27+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\"},\"description\":\"Supreme Court restored a summoning order in an abetment to suicide case, ruling that the High Court misapplied Section 319 CrPC by prioritizing unproved defence documents over sworn testimony.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Section-319-CrPC.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Section-319-CrPC.webp\",\"width\":886,\"height\":590,\"caption\":\"\u2018High Court misapplied S. 319 CrPC by prioritising unproved defence documents over sworn testimony\u2019; Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"\u2018High Court misapplied S. 319 CrPC by prioritising unproved defence documents over sworn testimony\u2019; Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9\",\"name\":\"Apoorva\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Apoorva\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case, says high court misapplied Section 319 CrPC | SCC Times","description":"Supreme Court restored a summoning order in an abetment to suicide case, ruling that the High Court misapplied Section 319 CrPC by prioritizing unproved defence documents over sworn testimony.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"\u2018High Court misapplied S. 319 CrPC by prioritising unproved defence documents over sworn testimony\u2019; Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case","og_description":"Supreme Court restored a summoning order in an abetment to suicide case, ruling that the High Court misapplied Section 319 CrPC by prioritizing unproved defence documents over sworn testimony.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2025-05-13T11:00:52+00:00","article_modified_time":"2025-05-13T11:02:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":886,"height":590,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Section-319-CrPC.jpeg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Apoorva","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_title":"\u2018High Court misapplied S. 319 CrPC by prioritising unproved defence documents over sworn testimony\u2019; Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Apoorva","Est. reading time":"7 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/","name":"Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case, says high court misapplied Section 319 CrPC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Section-319-CrPC.webp","datePublished":"2025-05-13T11:00:52+00:00","dateModified":"2025-05-13T11:02:27+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9"},"description":"Supreme Court restored a summoning order in an abetment to suicide case, ruling that the High Court misapplied Section 319 CrPC by prioritizing unproved defence documents over sworn testimony.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Section-319-CrPC.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Section-319-CrPC.webp","width":886,"height":590,"caption":"\u2018High Court misapplied S. 319 CrPC by prioritising unproved defence documents over sworn testimony\u2019; Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2025\/05\/13\/high-court-misapplied-s-319-crpc-supreme-court-restores-summoning-order\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"\u2018High Court misapplied S. 319 CrPC by prioritising unproved defence documents over sworn testimony\u2019; Supreme Court restores summoning order in abetment to suicide case"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/288d814d0864b57168e08daa1940a1c9","name":"Apoorva","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/549edb3ed2c7046a0c504583cf71db32c50251c1260a6331b2cc2973e80b0e91?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Apoorva"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc-editor\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/05\/Section-319-CrPC.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":286497,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/03\/06\/sc-reiterates-guidelines-for-power-under-section-319-crpc-legal-research-legal-news-updates\/","url_meta":{"origin":347669,"position":0},"title":"Trial in a Dowry Death case prompts Supreme Court to reiterate guidelines for exercising powers under Section 319 of CrPC","author":"Ridhi","date":"March 6, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"The Supreme Court directed the Trial Court to follow the guidelines extensively iterated by the Constitution Bench in the case of Sukhpal Singh Khaira for summoning the appellant as an additional accused.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-653.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-653.png?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-653.png?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/MicrosoftTeams-image-653.png?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":279181,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/12\/07\/section319-power-stage-to-exercise-before-order-of-sentence-acquittal-conviction-guidelines-supreme-court-legal-research-updates-criminal-law-trial-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":347669,"position":1},"title":"Section 319 CrPC power to be exercised before pronouncement of order of sentence or acquittal, as the case may be; SC enumerates 12 guidelines","author":"Prachi Bhardwaj","date":"December 7, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"On 10.05.2019, a division Bench had observed that the question with regard to the actual stage at which the trial is said to have concluded is required to be authoritatively considered since the power under Section 319 of CrPC is extraordinary in nature.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/MicrosoftTeams-image-16.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":278679,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/11\/28\/uttaranchal-high-court-section-319-crpc-word-appears-meaning-summoning-accused-higher-level-satisfaction-not-prima-facie-case-legal-updates-research-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":347669,"position":2},"title":"Uttaranchal High Court | Word \u201cappears\u201d under Section 319 CrPC has great significance; Higher level of satisfaction than mere prima facie case is required for summoning of an accused","author":"Editor","date":"November 28, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Uttaranchal High Court: While allowing the revision petitions, the single judge bench of Ravindra Maithani, J. has held that Sessions court has erred in summoning the revisionists to answer the accusations under Section 319 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (CrPC) as no prima facie case is made out\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/11\/MicrosoftTeams-image27.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200},"classes":[]},{"id":379105,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2026\/03\/23\/sc-strong-and-cogent-evidence-sufficient-summon-additional-accused-section-319-crpc\/","url_meta":{"origin":347669,"position":3},"title":"Section 319 CrPC | Court not to conduct mini-trial; strong and cogent evidence sufficient to summon additional accused: Supreme Court","author":"Ritu","date":"March 23, 2026","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cThe law consistently balances caution against undue summoning with the need to ensure that potentially implicated individuals are brought to trial when the record, taken as a whole, reasonably supports it.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Section 319 CrPC","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Section-319-CrPC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Section-319-CrPC.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Section-319-CrPC.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/Section-319-CrPC.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":243577,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/02\/08\/once-an-order-is-found-to-be-passed-without-jurisdiction-all-subsequent-proceedings-automatically-come-to-an-end-supreme-court\/","url_meta":{"origin":347669,"position":4},"title":"Once an order is found to be passed without jurisdiction, all subsequent proceedings automatically come to an end: Supreme Court","author":"Editor","date":"February 8, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: The 3-Judge Bench comprising of Ashok Bhushan*, R. Subhash Reddy and M.R. Shah allowed the instant appeal against the order of High Court of Uttrakhand regarding summon issued under S. 319 of CrPC. The Bench said, \u201cOrder dated 18-09-2019 by which the Trial Court has directed appearance of\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/02\/sc-2-7.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":6725,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2015\/08\/04\/ss-319-and-227-crpc-interpreted-and-distinguished\/","url_meta":{"origin":347669,"position":5},"title":"Ss. 319 and 227 CrPC, interpreted and distinguished","author":"Sucheta","date":"August 4, 2015","format":false,"excerpt":"Supreme Court: Interpreting Section 319 and 227 of CrPC, the bench of S.A. Bobde and R.K. Agrawal, JJ said that under Section 319 a person who is not an accused becomes liable to be added where he appears to have committed an offence whereas Section 227 on the other hand,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Supreme Court"","block_context":{"text":"Supreme Court","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/supremecourt\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/09\/Supreme-Court_Colour.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/347669","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/67512"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=347669"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/347669\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/347674"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=347669"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=347669"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=347669"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}