In Brief
The appellants challenged a High Court order that directed them to stand trial as additional accused in a case involving abduction and sexual assault of a 14-year-old girl. The High Court had invoked Section 319 Cr.P.C. (allowing courts to proceed against persons not named in original charge sheet) to include the appellants based on the victim's court statement naming them. The Supreme Court held that Section 319 power is discretionary and extraordinary, requiring strong and cogent evidence of the accused's complicity in the offence. Mere presence in the vehicle transporting the victim was insufficient. The Court reversed the High Court's order, emphasizing that courts cannot mechanically issue process whenever a name appears in a statement without satisfying the strict constitutional test for impleading additional accused."
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.