In Brief
In this criminal appeal, six persons named in an FIR but not charge-sheeted were summoned to stand trial under Section 319 CrPC after prosecution witnesses testified against them during trial. The appellants challenged the summons, arguing that the investigating officer had found them not present at the crime scene and that courts lack power to add accused after discharge. The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that the trial court validly exercised power under Section 319 CrPC because: (1) power can be exercised based on evidence recorded during trial, including examination-in-chief statements; (2) persons named in FIR but not charge-sheeted can be summoned when trial evidence implicates them; (3) release from custody differs from judicial discharge and does not bar subsequent summoning; (4) the satisfaction required is strong and cogent evidence, not mere probability.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.