'Trial Ends With Sentence Or Acquittal, Court Can Invoke Section 319 CrPC Any Time Before That': Amicus Curiae Nagamuthu Tells Supreme Court

The Supreme Court on Wednesday continued the hearing on whether Section 319 of the Cr. P. C. can be invoked after judgment is reserved.The 5-Judge Bench of Justices Abdul Nazeer, B. R. Gavai, A. S. Bopanna, V. Ramasubramanian and B. V. Nagarathna is hearing the matter. Earlier, Senior Advocate Paramjit Singh , for the petitioner, submitted that in his opinion his case is covered by the judgment of the Apex Court in Hardeep Singh v. state of Punjab which sets out circumstances under which power under Section 319 Cr. P. C. can be exercised. SG Tushar Mehta submitted that interpretation of the same would be required. Mr. Patwalia apprised the Bench that an application has been filed by the Union Government to intervene in the matter, which he would be opposing, because the parties are only the accused and the Punjab government. He requested the application may not be allowed before giving him an opportunity to file a reply. It was also pointed out that a PMLA proceeding has been initiated against the accused and now the Centre in a roundabout manner trying to protect their PMLA proceedings. The SG argued that the present proceeding does not pertain to the facts of the case and only deals with the law and is examining a central statute the intervention of the Union Government would be necessary. On 05.03.2015, an FIR was lodged against 11 accused persons for offences under the Narcotic Drugs and Psychotropic Substances Act, 1985, Arms Act and Information Technology Act, 2000. Under the first charge sheet, initially, ten accused were summoned and trial was going on. A second chargesheet was filed which did not name the said accused. Later, some prosecution witnesses were recalled and the accused were named. The prosecution filed an application under Section 319 CrPC in the first case summoning the accused. The Trial Court first pronounced the judgment convicting the nine other accused put on trial and thereafter allowed the prosecution application under Section 319 CrPC. The same was challenged before the Pujab and Haryana High Court. The order of the Trial Court was upheld by the High Court. While hearing the appeal, the Apex Court had referred to a Constitution Bench, three questions on the scope and ambit of power under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code which remains unanswered even after the judgment of the Constitution Bench in Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab:1. Whether the trial court has the power under Section 319 of CrPC for summoning additional accused when the trial with respect to other co-accused has ended and the judgment of conviction rendered on the same date before pronouncing the summoning order? 2. Whether the trial court has the power under Section 319 of the CrPC for summoning additional accused when the trial in respect of certain other absconding accused (whose presence is subsequently secured) is ongoing/pending, having been bifurcated from the main trial? 3. What are the guidelines that the competent court must follow while exercising power under Section 319 Cr.P.C?While referring the three questions to a larger bench, the Division Bench of the Apex Court had noted - "However, we are of the considered opinion that, power under Section 319, Cr.P.C being extraordinary in nature, the trial courts should be cautious while summoning accused to avoid complexities and to ensure fair trial. We must remind ourselves that timely disposal of the matters furthers the interest of justiceThe court-room exchange as it transpired on Wednesday is as follows-Bench: "Let us assume that in a case, trial is complete and the matter is posted for judgment. There is the power of the court to find out if somebody (an accused) has been left out deliberately. While assessing evidence, if the judge finds somebody should have been (arraigned as an accused), at that stage, he does not pronounce the judgment and he says that the matter be put up for further hearing. At that stage, can it (passing an order under section 319) be done?"Senior Advocate P. S. Patwalia, for the appellants: "There was a hiatus between posting the matter for judgment and pronouncing the judgment. When a judge is working through the judgment and he finds that this man is the main person who should be there. Then, according to me, he would post it for further hearing and then he would pass an order under 319 and thereafter, proceed accordingly"Bench: "The language employed in 353 (of the Cr. P. C.) is that the judgment in every trial in any criminal court of original jurisdiction shall be pronounced in open court by the presiding officer immediately after termination of the trial. Suppose immediately he pronounces...?"Mr. Patwalia: "Then we are in my situation. Then he cannot do it, according to me"Bench: "Now does it make any difference if he immediately pronounces or pronounces on a future date? Once the hearing is complete and once it is posted for judgement, the only thing he can do is that he has to pass a judgment this way or...

'Trial Ends With Sentence Or Acquittal, Court Can Invoke Section 319 CrPC Any Time Before That': Amicus Curiae Nagamuthu Tells Supreme Court

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

Tags