Allahabad High Court Quashes Summoning Order of Additional Accused in Chandauli Assault Case
Court Criticizes Trial Court's Oversight in Applying Section 319 Cr.P.C. Without Adequate Evidence
In a significant ruling, the Allahabad High Court set aside the summoning order against Ramnarayan Ram Daroga and two others, who were called to face trial in connection with a 2010 assault case in Chandauli district. The judgment, delivered by Justice Sameer Jain on September 16, 2025, highlighted the misuse of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.) by the trial court.
The case stemmed from an incident on November 12, 2010, where the complainants accused Ramnarayan and others of assault, resulting in injuries to the complainant's family. However, the First Information Report (FIR) was filed three months after the incident, raising questions about the delay's impact on the case's credibility.
The trial court had summoned the accused based on testimonies provided during the trial. However, the High Court emphasized that the trial court failed to ensure that more than a prima-facie case was established, as required under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The judgment noted that the trial court acted in a routine manner without the necessary scrutiny of evidence quality.
Justice Jain pointed out that the trial court overlooked the significant delay in FIR filing and the implications of such delay on witness credibility. The High Court underscored that the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is extraordinary and should only be exercised when there is compelling evidence against the accused.
The ruling also drew on precedents from the Supreme Court, including the cases of Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab and Brijendra Singh v. State of Rajasthan, which clarify that the evidence for summoning must be recorded during the trial and not merely based on the charge-sheet or investigation materials.
Ultimately, the High Court concluded that the trial court's decision to summon the revisionists was unsustainable due to insufficient evidence and a lack of deeper analysis of the testimonies. The order dated October 30, 2023, was consequently quashed, allowing the revision filed by Ramnarayan Ram Daroga and others.
Bottom Line:
Section 319 Cr.P.C. - Summoning an additional accused during trial - The power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is extraordinary and should be used sparingly and with circumspection. Trial court must ensure that more than a prima-facie case is made out against the accused before summoning them under this provision.
Statutory provision(s): Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 Section 319, Evidence Act, 1872 Section 3
Ramnarayan Ram Daroga v. State of U.P., (Allahabad) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2779594
