In Brief
A complainant sought to have a second respondent summoned as an additional accused in a murder trial under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code, claiming he was named in the FIR and had allegedly attacked the deceased. The trial court and High Court both refused, finding contradictions in witness statements and investigation reports confirming the respondent was at his workplace elsewhere during the incident. The Supreme Court held that while Section 319 grants courts power to summon additional accused persons, this power is discretionary and extraordinary, requiring strong and cogent evidence—a higher threshold than for initial charges. Mere mention in the FIR or some incriminating witness statements are insufficient. Since concurrent findings by both lower courts supported the respondent's absence from the scene, the appeal was dismissed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.