In Brief
The appellant was a firm owner working with the deceased. After the deceased's murder, the appellant was listed as a prosecution witness. The complainant later sought to summon the appellant as an additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. The Trial Court dismissed this application. The High Court remanded it for fresh examination. The Supreme Court held that power to summon additional accused requires strong, cogent evidence demonstrating near probability of complicity—a test more stringent than prima facie case but short of conviction-level certainty. Mere suspicion is insufficient. Since the available evidence fell short of this standard, the Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and dismissed the application to summon the appellant as accused.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.