Bhagwan Dass and anr. vs State of Punjab

J.M. Tandon, J.

Bhagwan Dass and Kundan Lal were named in F.I.R. No. 78 dated January 24, 1984, under section 307/326/324/323/148/149,. Indian Penal Code. The police submitted challan against Krishan Lal, Sunam Chand and Ram Chand. The petitioners were not challaned. Jinda Ram Complainant approached the trial Court vide application dated September 21, 1984, praying that the petitioners be summoned as accused to stand trial. The Judicial Magistrate 1st Class, Fazilka, vide order dated October 15, 1984, summoned them as accused to stand trial along with the remaining accused on the ground that they had been named in the F.I.R. and injuries to the complainant had also been attributed to them. It is against this order that the present revision has been filed.

It is not disputed that the petitioners have been summoned as accused by the trial Court under section 319, Criminal Procedure Code, Section 319 (1) reads :

"Where, in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of an offence, it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence for which such person should be tried together with the accused, the Court may proceed against such person for the offence which he appears to have committed."

It is obvious that the trial Court could summon the petitioners after recording some evidence and not otherwise. In the instant case, the trial Magistrate has summoned the petitioners as accused under section 319, Criminal Procedure Code, without recording any evidence. The impugned order is bad and cannot be sustained.

In the result, the revision is allowed and the impugned order of the trial Court set aside. It will be open for the trial Court to pass an order afresh in terms of section 319, Criminal Procedure Code, after recording the evidence.

Revision allowed.