TMI Blog2007 (4) TMI 735X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eption thereto could be taken far less at the instance of a witness and when the State was not aggrieved by the same. It is evident that before a court exercises its discretionary jurisdiction in terms of Section 319 of the CrPC, it must arrive at the satisfaction that there exists a possibility that the accused so summoned is in all likelihood would be convicted. Such satisfaction can be arrived at inter alia upon completion of the cross-examination of the said witness. For the said purpose, the court concerned may also like to consider other evidence. We are, therefore, of the view that the High Court has committed an error in passing the impugned judgment. It is accordingly set aside. The appeal is allowed. - S.B. Sinha and Ma ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to be recorded in Paper No. l dated 10.11.2005 that he reached. Reaching the sport after the incident as stated by this witness. And accused Karimullah is said to be the incident doer. Hence, the application is not acceptable at this stage. The application Under Section 319 Cr.P.C. is being dismissed at this stage. 3. Respondent No. 1 filed an application before the High Court of Judicature at Allahabad under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the said order and by reason of the impugned order, the same has been allowed, The appellant is, thus, before us. Contention of the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant before us is that keeping in view the fact that the learned Sessions Judge had refused to exercise his discretionary jurisdict ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... such person had been an accused person when the Court took cognizance of the offence upon which the inquiry or trial was commenced. 5. Before, thus, a trial court seeks to take recourse to the said provision, the requisite ingredients therefore must be fulfilled. Commission of an offence by a person not facing trial, must, therefore, appears to the court concerned. It cannot be ipse dixit on the part of the court. Discretion in this behalf must be judicially exercised. It is incumbent that the court must arrive at its satisfaction in this behalf. 6. As interpretation of the above-mentioned provision is now covered by some decisions of this Court, we need not state ingredients at this stage. In Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ram ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rned Sessions Judge was not even an interim order affecting the rights of the parties. Even revision application there against could not have been maintained at that stage. 8. The Trial Judge, as noticed by us, in terms of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was required to arrive at his satisfaction. If he thought that the matter should receive his due consideration only after the cross-examination of the witnesses is over, no exception thereto could be taken far less at the instance of a witness and when the State was not aggrieved by the same. 9. From the decisions of this Court, as noticed above, it is evident that before a court exercises its discretionary jurisdiction in terms of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Pro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
