Dismissed

Md. Alam Khan @ Alam Khan and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Patna HC13 May 2014CR. MISC./19216/2013

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The Patna High Court dismissed the application under Section 482 CrPC seeking to quash the summoning of petitioners as additional accused under Section 319 CrPC, noting the petitioners failed to submit witness depositions from the trial court.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 482 of CrPC to quash summoning order dismissed; petitioners' application remains rejected.

Md. Alam Khan @ Alam Khan and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar… — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Patna HC (2014)

¶1

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA

¶2

Criminal Miscellaneous No.19216 of 2013

¶3

======================================================

¶4

Md. Alam Khan @ Alam Khan S/o Ejaj Khan

¶5

Sakila Khatoon W/o Md. Alam Khan

¶6

Md. Ishrail @ Md. Ishrail Khan S/o Ejaj Khan

¶7

Shakila Khatoon W/o Md. Ishrail

¶8

Bobby Khatoon W/o Jahangir Khan

¶9

Jahangir Khan S/o Md. Alauddin Khan

¶10

Afraj Khan S/o Md. Alam Khan.

¶11

All are residents of village- Parrahi, P.S. - Belsand, Distt. - Sitamarhi

¶12

.... .... Petitioners

¶13

Versus

¶14

State of Bihar

¶15

Shaheena Khatoon D/o Md. Salim, R/o Village - Pandrahi, P.S. - Belsand, Distt. - Sitamarhi

¶16

.... .... Opposite Parties

¶17

======================================================

¶18

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHWANI KUMAR SINGH ORAL ORDER

¶19

3 13-05-2014 Heard learned counsel for the petitioners and learned counsel for the State.

¶20

The present application under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Code’) has been filed for quashing of the order dated 12^th March, 2013 passed in Sessions Trial No. 354 of 2011 arising out of Belsand P.S. Case No. 41 of 2011 by the learned Ad hoc Additional Sessions Judge-VI, Sitamarhi by which he has

¶21

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19216 of 2013 (3) dt.13-05-2014

¶22

2 / 4

¶23

summoned the petitioners under Section 319 of the Code to appear and face trial.

¶24

Learned counsel for the p;etitoners has submitted that initially the petitioners were made accused in Belsand P.S. Case No. 41 of 2011dated 7^th April, 2011 registered for the offences punishable under Sections 366, 376, 379, 323, 504, 506 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code.

¶25

The police investigated the case and on conclusion of investigation though co-accused Amroz Khan was sent up for trial but the police found the accusation as against the petitioners to be false and, thus, they were not sent up for trial.

¶26

The Magistrate concerned took cognizance of the offence punishable under Section 366 of the Indian Penal Code against co-accused Amroz Khan and committed the case to the Court of Sessions for trial.

¶27

In course of trial, altogether six witnesses were examined on behalf of the prosecution and thereafter, an application under Section 319 of the Code was filed by the prosecution for summoning the petitioners as additional accused on the ground that all the witnesses examined in the Court had deposed that the petitioners were involved in the commission of crime. The trial court allowed the prayer of the prosecution and

¶28

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19216 of 2013 (3) dt.13-05-2014

¶29

3 / 4

¶30

summoned the petitioners by impugned order.

¶31

Learned counsel for the petitioners has contended that the impugned order passed by the Sessions Judge is cryptic in nature and the same has been passed mechanically without taking into consideration the fact as to whether the evidence led on behalf of the prosecution were sufficient enough to convict the petitioners.

¶32

On the other hand, learned counsel for the State has contended that the order passed by the Court below is reasoned one. It has categorically been held in the order under challenge that the witnesses examined in course of trial have made specific allegations against the petitioners and finding cogent evidence against the petitioners, the Court below has summoned the petitioners as additional accused by exercising its power under Section 319 of the Code.

¶33

I have heard the parties and perused the record. At the outset, I must record that despite adjournment having been granted to the petitioners, they have failed to bring on record the deposition of witnesses led in trial in the Court below. It is true that Section 319 of the Code is 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

¶34

Patna High Court Cr.Misc. No.19216 of 2013 (3) dt.13-05-2014

¶35

4 / 4

¶36

the other persons. However, Section 319 of the Code empowers the court to proceed with the persons not being the accused appearing to be guilty of offence and to issue process for the purpose. It provides that cognizance against the newly added accused is deemed to have been taken in the same manner in which cognizance of the offence has been taken against the persons earlier. The Sessions Court has recorded that all the witnesses examined in course of trial have made allegations against the petitioners. If the petitioners intended to challenge the finding of the Sessions Court, they ought to have brought on record the deposition of witnesses recorded in course of trial. That having not been done, it would be difficult for this Court to rely on the version of the petitioners that there is no evidence against them.

¶37

In that view of the matter, I am not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Court below in exercise of discretionary powers conferred upon it under Section 319 of the Code.

¶38

Accordingly, the application is dismissed.

¶39

(Ashwani Kumar Singh, J)

¶40

Sanjeet/-

Md. Alam Khan @ Alam Khan and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Md. Alam Khan @ Alam Khan and Ors. v. State Of Bihar and Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Feku Rai and Anr. Vs The State Of Bihar

Narendra Deo Vs The State Of Bihar

Pramod Singh Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Gauri Shankar Sah and Ors. Vs State Of Bihar and Anr.

Vijay Kumar Chaurasia Vs The State Of Bihar

Lakeshwar Yadav @ Lalkeshwar Yadav Vs The State Of Bihar