Sarabjit Singh and Another Versus State of Punjab and Another-Criminal Procedure Code, 1973—Section 319—Summoning of additional suspect to face trial—Power under Section 319 is an extra-ordinary power which is required to be exercised sparingly and if compelling reasons exist for taking cognizance against whom action has not been taken—Materials brought before Court must also be such which would satisfy Court that it is one of those cases where its jurisdiction should be exercised sparingly—An order under Section 319 should not be passed only because first informant or one of witnesses seeks to implicate other person(s)—Sufficient and cogent reasons are required to be assigned by Court so as to satisfy ingredients of the provisions—Mere ipse dixit or mere existence of a prima facie case may not serve the purpose—Impugned judgment set aside—Appeals allowed. Error! No text of specified style in document. vs. Error! No text of specified style in document.
When a statute is passed for the purpose of enabling something to be done, and prescribes the way in which it is to be done, it may be either an absolute enactment or a directory enactment. The difference being that an absolute enactment must be obeyed or fulfilled exactly, but it is sufficient if a directory enactment be obeyed or fulfilled substantially.
The basic requirements for invoking Section 319 Cr.P.C. is that it should appear to the Court from the evidence collected during trial or in the inquiry that some other person, who is not arraigned as an accused in that case, had committed an offence for which that person could be tried together with the accused already arraigned.
On a careful reading of Sec. 319 of the Code as well as the aforesaid two decisions, it becomes clear that the trial court has undoubted jurisdiction to add any person not […]