BANGARAYYA Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard counsel for the parties.

(2.) Leave granted.

(3.) On a report filed by the appellant on September 1, 2002, a case was registered against 17 persons named as accused in the report. The police after investigation, submitted charge sheet under Sections 143, 147, 451, 323, 427, 504, 506 read with Section 149 of the Penal Code against all the accused named in the FIR, excepting accused Nos. 2, 3 & 6. The learned magistrate proceeded with the trial summoning only those accused against whom the charge sheet was submitted. During the trial, prosecution witnesses 1 & 2 (examined on August 24, 2007 and February 2, 2008 respectively) in their deposition narrated the occurrence in detail and also named accused Nos. 2, 3 & 6 (respondent Nos. 2-4 herein), against whom the police had not submitted the charge sheet, among the offenders. The prosecution then filed a petition under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter Rs. the Code) for summoning those three accused as well for facing trial. The magistrate by a brief order passed on August 18, 2009, rejected the application. He took the view that the two witnesses were related to the complainant and no independent witness had till then been examined before him. He further observed that it was an old case in which the accused had been appearing in court from 2003. Summoning of the three more accused would further delay the matter. Some of the accused were "teachers and well known persons" and they would suffer due to the delay caused by summoning the additional accused.