9911796707
TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 735X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t was submitted as against the appellant herein. After the matter was taken up for hearing before the learned Trial Judge, respondent No. 1 examined himself as P.W. 1. In. his examination-in-chief, he alleged that the incident had taken place in his presence and the appellant had taken part in the incident. An application was filed for summoning the appellant herein under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure only on the basis thereof. The learned Sessions Judge refused to accede to the said prayer stating: File is taken up, Statement has been perused in regard to the application Under Section 319 Cr.P.C. On perusal of the statement of the witness PW 1 Rafiq, up till now, witness's chief examination is only done. The witn ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e.-(1) 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 could be tried together with the accused, the Court may proceed against such person for the offence which he appears to have committed. (2) Where such person is not attending the Court he may be arrested or summoned, as the circumstances of the case may require, for the purpose aforesaid. (3) Any person attending the Court although not under arrest or upon a summons, may be detained by such court for the purpose of the inquiry into, or trial of, the offence which he appears to have committed. (4) Where the Court proceeds against any p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nce against them and try them along with the other accused. But, we would, hasten to add that this is really an extraordinary power which is conferred on the court and should be used very sparingly and only if compelling reasons exist for taking cognizance against the other person against whom action has not been taken. More than this we would not like to say anything further at this stage. We leave the entire matter to the discretion of the court concerned so that it may act according to law. (Emphasis supplied) This aspect of the matter has also recently been considered in Yuvrag Ambar Mohite v. State of Maharashtra, reported in 2006(10)SCALE369 . 7. Respondent No. 1 states that he was merely a witness. He had no say in the matte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
