SATBIR SINGH versus RAJESH KUMAR AND OTHERS

SATBIR SINGH versus RAJESH KUMAR AND OTHERS

The High Court erred in setting aside the Sessions Judge's order summoning additional accused under Section 319 CrPC because the Sessions Judge had formed a plausible satisfaction, based on the appellant's examination-in-chief and other material, that their complicity required trial; the revisional court should not have substituted its view where the trial court's conclusion was not absurd or legally impermissible, and therefore the Sessions Judge's order was restored.

Parties
Appellant: Satbir Singh; Respondent: Rajesh Kumar; Respondent: Sagar @ Bittoo; Respondent: Neeraj; Respondent: Ankit; Respondent: State of Haryana
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
31 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court After High Court Set Aside Sessions Judge Order
Outcome
Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside and order of the Sessions Judge restored
Legal Topics
Summoning Additional Accused Under Section 319 Cr PC, Revisional Jurisdiction of High Court, Degree of Satisfaction for Summoning Accused, Role of Police Investigation Reports, Medical Evidence and Corroboration
Criminal Procedure Criminal Law Summoning Additional Accused Under Section 319 Cr PC Revisional Jurisdiction of High Court Degree of Satisfaction for Summoning Accused Role of Police Investigation Reports Medical Evidence and Corroboration

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Satbir Singh

Appellant

Rajesh Kumar

Respondent

Sagar @ Bittoo

Respondent

Neeraj

Respondent

Ankit

Respondent

State of Haryana

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal to Supreme Court After High Court Set Aside Sessions Judge Order

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Sessions Judge rightly summoned additional accused under Section 319 CrPC
  2. 2 Whether the High Court erred in setting aside the Sessions Judge's order summoning additional accused
  3. 3 What degree of satisfaction is required to exercise power under Section 319 CrPC

Ratio Decidendi

The High Court erred in setting aside the Sessions Judge's order summoning additional accused under Section 319 CrPC because the Sessions Judge had formed a plausible satisfaction, based on the appellant's examination-in-chief and other material, that their complicity required trial; the revisional court should not have substituted its view where the trial court's conclusion was not absurd or legally impermissible, and therefore the Sessions Judge's order was restored.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; impugned High Court order set aside and order of the Sessions Judge restored

Orders

  • Impugned judgment and order dated 07.03.2024 of the High Court of Punjab & Haryana at Chandigarh set aside
  • Order dated 13.09.2021 of the Additional Sessions Judge, Karnal restored (application under Section 319 CrPC allowed)