Search The Civil Litigator

Friday, May 15, 2026

319 and discharge

Yashodhan Singh v. State of U.P., (2023) 9 SCC 108 : 2023 SCC OnLine SC 890 at page 128

34. In para 13 of Jogendra Yadav [Jogendra Yadav v. State of Bihar, (2015) 9 SCC 244 : (2015) 3 SCC (Cri) 756] , it has been observed that the exercise of power under Section 319CrPC must be placed on a higher pedestal. Needless to say, the accused summoned under Section 319CrPC are entitled to invoke the remedy under law against an illegal or improper exercise of power under Section 319CrPC but that cannot have the effect of the order being undone by seeking a discharge under Section 227CrPC. Therefore, this Court categorically held that a person, who is summoned under Section 319CrPC cannot avail the remedy of discharge under Section 227CrPC. In that context, this Court, as already noted, discussed the difference between Sections 227 and 319CrPC, as extracted above.

Jogendra Yadav v. State of Bihar, (2015) 9 SCC 244 : (2015) 3 SCC (Cri) 756 : 2015 SCC OnLine SC 674 at page 250

13. We are not unmindful of the fact that the interpretation placed by us on the scheme of Sections 319 and 227 makes Section 227 unavailable to an accused who has been added under Section 319 CrPC. We are of the view, for the reasons given above, that this must necessarily be so since a view to the contrary would render the exercise undertaken by a court under Section 319 CrPC, for summoning an accused, on the basis of a higher standard of proof totally infructuous and futile if the same court were to subsequently discharge the same accused by exercise of the power under Section 227 CrPC, on the basis of a mere prima facie view. The exercise of the power under Section 319 CrPC, must be placed on a higher pedestal. Needless to say the accused summoned under Section 319 CrPC, are entitled to invoke remedy under law against an illegal or improper exercise of the power under Section 319, but cannot have the effect of the order undone by seeking a discharge under Section 227 CrPC. If allowed to, such an action of discharge would not be in accordance with the purpose of Criminal Procedure Code in enacting Section 319 which empowers the Court to summon a person for being tried along with the other accused where it appears from the evidence that he has committed an offence.

No comments:

Post a Comment