Discretionary And Extraordinary Power Under Section 319 CrPC Should Be Exercised Sparingly: SC
Discretionary and Extraordinary Power Under Section 319 CrPC Should Be Exercised Sparingly: Supreme Court
1. Understanding Section 319 CrPC
Section 319 CrPC empowers a Magistrate or Sessions Court to summon and try any person as an accused at any stage of an inquiry or trial if there is sufficient ground to believe that such person has committed an offence related to the case.
It is a judicial power to bring additional accused into the ongoing trial.
The section acts as a tool to ensure justice and prevent misuse of process, by including all responsible parties in a criminal trial.
2. Nature of the Power
The power under Section 319 is discretionary and extraordinary, not automatic or routine.
It is incidental to the main trial proceedings and not the starting point of a fresh case.
The Court’s role is to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and avoid injustice by excluding culpable persons.
However, this power must be exercised with caution and prudence.
3. Why Should Section 319 Be Exercised Sparingly?
Summoning a new accused at the trial stage affects their personal liberty and reputation.
It may cause prejudice to the new accused due to the trial already being underway.
The Court must ensure that there is sufficient ground or prima facie evidence against the person to be summoned.
Exercising this power without proper grounds amounts to judicial overreach and abuse.
Ensures that the dignity of the judicial process and fairness to all parties is maintained.
4. Supreme Court’s Observations
The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that Section 319 is an exceptional power.
It should be exercised only when there is credible evidence suggesting involvement of the new accused.
Courts must be careful to avoid harassment or unnecessary complications in the trial.
The power is not intended to encroach on the powers of the prosecution or be used to call persons without prima facie material.
5. Key Case Laws
a) Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab (2014), Supreme Court
The Court emphasized that Section 319 is a discretionary power to be exercised sparingly.
It should be exercised when there is sufficient ground to believe the person is involved.
Courts must balance the need for justice with the rights of the newly summoned accused.
b) K.M. Nanavati v. State of Maharashtra (1962), Supreme Court
The Court noted that the power under Section 319 is not a substitute for the police or prosecution to investigate or include accused at will.
It must be exercised judiciously after careful scrutiny of evidence.
c) Sunil Batra v. Delhi Administration (1978), Supreme Court
The Court ruled that the power should not be exercised in a mechanical or routine manner.
The Magistrate must be satisfied with prima facie evidence before summoning.
d) State of Punjab v. Surjit Singh (2014), Supreme Court
Affirmed that Section 319 powers are to be exercised to ensure ends of justice, but with care to protect the rights of the summoned person.
6. Practical Guidelines for Exercising Section 319 Power
| Parameter | Guidance |
|---|---|
| When to exercise | When sufficient prima facie evidence indicates involvement |
| Nature of power | Discretionary, extraordinary, and incidental |
| Effect on new accused | Personal liberty impacted; fair hearing essential |
| Court’s responsibility | Balance justice delivery with protection from harassment |
| Avoid | Arbitrary, mechanical, or unjust summoning |
7. Conclusion
The Supreme Court has clearly established that the discretionary and extraordinary power under Section 319 CrPC must be exercised sparingly and judiciously. This ensures that the power acts as a safeguard for justice without infringing on the rights of individuals or derailing ongoing proceedings unnecessarily.
RELATED Blog
0 comments