The Supreme Court noted that the merits of the evidence must be evaluated only during the trial, not at the stage of Section 319 CrPC.
In this instance, an application under section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code was filed with the trial court and granted. The High Court granted the accused’s petition for a rehearing because he was found blameless during the investigation, had never used the weapon, and had fled the scene.
In an appeal, the Supreme Court determined that the High Court’s approach was incorrect. It read:
“The reasoning given by the High Court cannot be accepted at the stage of consideration of an application under Section 319 Cr. PC. The merits of the evidence have to be appreciated only during the trial, by cross-examination of the witnesses and by scrutiny of the Court. This is not to be done at the stage of Section 319, though this is precisely what the High Court has done in the present case.
Moreover, the High Court did not appreciate the critical fact that the charges being faced by the accused were under Sections 458, 460, 323, 285, 302, 148 and 149 of IPC.“
The Court added that to be guilty of the offence under Section 149 of the Indian Penal Code, one need only participate in an illicit assembly. “Any specific individual function or action is irrelevant. “No overt act must be attributed to a member of an unlawful assembly,” the document stated.
“The sole purpose of a criminal trial is to determine the truth. As soon as the Court is satisfied with sufficient evidence that an accused has committed an offence, it can proceed with the case. When summoning an accused, the Court must be happy at first glance. The evidence presented to the Court was from an eyewitness who stated unequivocally that the revisionist, among others, had committed a crime. The Court need to avoid cross-examining this witness. If such an application was filed under Section 319, the Court can suspend the trial at that point. The detailed examination of the witness and other witnesses is an aspect of the prosecution that must be restarted, the Court remarked as it reinstated the Trial Court’s order.
CASE DETAILS
Sandeep Kumar vs State Of Haryana | 2023 INSC 654
HEAD NOTES
Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973; Section 319 – The merits of the evidence have to be appreciated only during the trial, by cross-examination of the witnesses and scrutiny of the Court. This is not to be done in Section 319 – Scope and ambit discussed – Referred to Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 3 SCC 92. (Para 4-5). Indian Penal Code, 1860; Section 149 – To attract the offence under Section 149 IPC, one must be a part of an unlawful assembly -Any specific individual role or act is not material. No overt act needs to be assigned to a member of an illegal assembly – Referred to Yunis alias Kariya v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 2003 SC 539. (Para 4)
