'Whether Section 319 of CrPC Can Be Invoked After Judgment Reserved?": Supreme Court Constitution Bench Reserved Judgement

The Supreme Court on Thursday reserved its judgment 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 was hearing the matter. Earlier, Senior Advocate P. S. Patwalia, for the petitioner, had 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 Cr. P. C. 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 Cr. P. C. 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 Thursday is as follows-On Wednesday, the Advocate General for the state of Punjab, Senior Advocate Amit Ghai, had advanced, "The pronouncement of judgment will be with the passing of sentence, not the passing of conviction order, because the court is not functus officio yet. The court has still to apply its mind. The trial does not conclude, it does not come to an end till the sentence. Even after passing the judgment, the court still has to apply its mind, he has the Sessions file, he has to issue the sentence. He may issue the summoning order after that and then sentence. Only after sentence is pronounced that the trial comes to an end". The Bench had asked, "Once both sides have been heard and the evidence is completed, normally the trial would come to an end. Tell us on the facts of the instant case- here, judgment is pronounced. Thereafter, 319 application is allowed?". The Advocate General had responded, "The order says he is convicted, not convicted and sentenced. In the conviction order, they are on bail. In the sentence order, they are in custody. How can that be in the same order? They are taken into custody, they are heard on sentence and then sentenced. It cannot be said that both the orders were passed at the same time, the order of sentence is always attached to the order of conviction. it is never at the same time. Usually conviction judgment is before lunch and sentencing is after lunch. It is so in 99% of the cases". The bench...

'Whether Section 319 of CrPC Can Be Invoked After Judgment Reserved?": Supreme Court Constitution Bench Reserved Judgement

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

'Whether Section 319 of CrPC Can Be Invoked After Judgment Reserved?": Supreme Court Constitution Bench Reserved Judgement

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content Available exclusively to Our subscribers

INR 1099+GST

Tags

LIVELAW NEWS NETWORK

This is a premium content
Available exclusively to
Our subscribers