top of page
Judge Gavel
Search

Supreme Court: Cross-Examination Must Be Considered in Section 319 CrPC Applications

Writer's picture: Legal Soch FoundationLegal Soch Foundation
2 min read

The Supreme Court of India has emphasized the necessity of considering cross-examination while deciding applications under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which pertains to summoning additional accused. The ruling was delivered in the case of Hetram @ Babli vs. State of Rajasthan & Anr., with a bench comprising Justice Abhay S. Oka and Justice A.G. Masih.


The Court observed that summoning an additional accused under Section 319 CrPC cannot solely rely on the examination-in-chief of prosecution witnesses. Instead, when cross-examination is available, it must be given due consideration to determine whether a prima facie case exists against the proposed accused.


This judgment arose from an appeal filed by the accused challenging the High Court's decision, which upheld a summoning application based solely on the prosecution's examination-in-chief. The appellant argued that while the examination-in-chief contained incriminating statements, the subsequent cross-examination revealed omissions amounting to contradictions, weakening the allegations.


Justice Oka clarified that Section 319 CrPC empowers courts to summon additional accused only if there is sufficient prima facie evidence of their involvement. He reasoned that when both examination-in-chief and cross-examination are on record, it would be improper to ignore cross-examination while evaluating the application.


The bench cited the precedent set in Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab (2014), which held that courts must refrain from exercising Section 319 CrPC powers unless a prima facie case is established. Applying this principle, the Court found that the prosecution witnesses' cross-examinations contradicted their examination-in-chief, negating the existence of a prima facie case.


The Court allowed the appeal, setting aside the summoning order. It clarified that its evaluation of evidence was limited to deciding the Section 319 CrPC application.


This ruling reinforces the importance of balanced evidence assessment and ensures fair exercise of judicial powers under Section 319 CrPC.


Citation:

2024 LiveLaw (SC) 930





Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page