JARNAIL SINGH AND ANR. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

JARNAIL SINGH AND ANR. versus STATE OF HARYANA AND ANR.

The court may summon a person not already an accused in the case before it, even if he is accused in another case relating to the same occurrence but with a different version, provided evidence so warrants. Section 319 CrPC does not exclude such person from its purview. No violation of Article 20(2) arises, and the exercise of discretion by the court below was proper and legal; petitions are dismissed.

Parties
Petitioner: Jarnail Singh; Respondent: State of Haryana; Respondent: Respondent No. 2 (Complainant)
Jurisdiction
India
Judgment Date
09 April 2003
Procedural Posture
Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (crl) Nos. 2941 2942 of 2002 / Supreme Court Decision on SLP Dismissal
Outcome
Petitions dismissed
Legal Topics
Section 319 Cr PC (summoning of Additional Accused), Article 20(2) Constitution of India, Double Jeopardy, Exercise of Discretionary Powers by Court, Trial Procedure
Criminal Law Constitutional Law Section 319 Cr PC (summoning of Additional Accused) Article 20(2) Constitution of India Double Jeopardy Exercise of Discretionary Powers by Court Trial Procedure

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 5 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jarnail Singh

Petitioner

State of Haryana

Respondent

Respondent No. 2 (Complainant)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Petition for Special Leave to Appeal (crl) Nos. 2941 2942 of 2002 / Supreme Court Decision on SLP Dismissal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether Section 319 Cr. P.C. can be invoked to summon as accused persons who are already accused in a police case for the same occurrence but with a different version
  2. 2 Whether the discretionary power under Section 319 Cr. P.C. was exercised properly by the Sessions Court
  3. 3 Whether Article 20(2) of the Constitution which bars double jeopardy is violated by the summoning order

Ratio Decidendi

The court may summon a person not already an accused in the case before it, even if he is accused in another case relating to the same occurrence but with a different version, provided evidence so warrants. Section 319 CrPC does not exclude such person from its purview. No violation of Article 20(2) arises, and the exercise of discretion by the court below was proper and legal; petitions are dismissed.

Court Disposition

Petitions dismissed

Orders

  • Petitions dismissed