Breaking SUPREME COURT CRACKS DOWN ON HOME LOAN SUBVENTION FRAUD: CBI PROBE EXPEDITED, 30-DAY SANCTION DEADLINE FOR BANK OFFICIALS
New Delhi · Friday, 07 August 2026 9888666310 | [email protected]
Free Law — free judgments and free headnotes Free Lawby De Jure
Supreme Court of India 2019-02-27 allowed

SUNIL KUMAR GUPTA vs THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH

Bench: 2 — R. Banumathi, R. Subhash Reddy

In Brief

A woman died in a kerosene fire incident in 2012. Her father filed a complaint alleging multiple family members poured kerosene on her, but her dying declaration named only one person. Only that person was charged with murder. Years into trial, the prosecution sought to summon the appellants (other family members) under Section 319 CrPC as additional accused for murder. The Supreme Court held that summoning additional accused requires much stronger evidence than mere probability. Since the dying declaration named only the charged accused and witness evidence provided no specific acts by the appellants, no prima facie case existed. The Court set aside the summoning orders and allowed the appeals.

The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.

Criminal Procedure Dowry Prohibition Dying Declaration Summoning of Additional Accused Evidence

Read the full judgment & headnote. It's free.

Register to read the complete Supreme Court judgment text and the headnote, and to search 1 lakh+ Supreme Court judgments by meaning. It is a free service.

Register Free Login