Persons Who Are Discharged At The Stage Of Framing Charge Can Be Summoned U/S 319 CrPC: Patna HC
The Patna High Court was deciding a Criminal Revision Petition challenging the Trial Court's Order summoning some persons under Section 319 CrPC.

The Patna High Court held that the persons who are discharged at the stage of framing of charge can be summoned under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC).
The Court held thus in a Criminal Revision Petition preferred against the Order of the Trial Court by which some persons were summoned under Section 319 CrPC for facing trial.
A Single Bench of Justice Jitendra Kumar observed, “Here, the expression ‘any person’ means any person who is not being tried by the Court in the ongoing trial. It includes even such persons who were named in the FIR but not charge-sheeted after investigation. Even such persons who were discharged at the stage of framing of charge are included in the expression “any person” and may be summoned under Section 319 Cr.PC complying with the requirements of Section 300 and 398 Cr.PC.”
Advocate Vijay Kumar Mishra appeared on behalf of the Petitioners while APP Upendra Kumar appeared on behalf of the Respondents.
Facts of the Case
As per the prosecution case, a written report was given by the informant to the Officer Incharge of Police Station that four accused persons set fire to the hut like house of the informant where he was shifting his household items after demolishing his old house. The house got burnt and at the time of burning of the house, his brother and son were present. Four new cycles, big boxes, hundred sacks of grains, paddy and wheat, sewing machine, pumping sets, thrasher, and other items worth Rs. 4-5 lakhs got destroyed. The accused persons allegedly fled away after setting fire to his house.
Resultantly, a case was registered against the accused persons for the offence punishable under Section 436 read with Section 34 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC). Post investigation, chargesheet was submitted only against one of the accused persons and the rest ones were exonerated by the Police. One Application was moved by the prosecution for summoning the rest accused persons who were the Petitioners and the same was allowed by the Trial Court. Being aggrieved, they approached the High Court.
Reasoning
The High Court in view of the above facts, reiterated, “… the persons named in the FIR, but not charge-sheeted by the police after investigation, may be summoned by the Court, provided the Court is satisfied that the conditions provided in the statutory provisions stand fulfilled.”
The Court further noted that the power under Section 319 CrPC is discretionary and extraordinary which is to be exercised sparingly only in those cases where the circumstances of the case so warrant and the same should not be exercised in a casual and cavalier manner.
“It also emerges that at the time of summoning under Section 319 Cr.PC the Court has to see that there is a strong and cogent evidence against such person laid before the Court and not merely probability of his complicity. The degree of satisfaction of the Court is much stricter. The test that has to be applied is one which is more than prima facie case as exercised at the time of framing of charge, but short of satisfaction to an extent that the evidence, if goes unrebutted, would lead to conviction”, it also enunciated.
The Court observed that it can exercise its power under Section 319 CrPC even at the stage of completion of examination-in-chief and it is not required to wait till the completion of cross-examination.
“It is for the Court to be satisfied regarding the complicity of other persons not facing the trial in the offence, as per the evidence on record. … persons named in the FIR but not charge-sheeted after investigation can be summoned under Section 319 Cr.PC if the Court finds that there is strong and cogent evidence recorded during trial regarding their complicity in the offence”, it added.
The Court, therefore, concluded that it was legally permissible for the Court to summon the Petitioners under Section 319 CrPC, if the evidence recorded during the ongoing trial was strong and cogent.
Accordingly, the High Court dismissed the Criminal Revision Petition and upheld the impugned Order.
Cause Title- Draupadi Kunwar @ Draupati Kunwar & Ors. v. The State of Bihar & Anr.