ABDUL MAJID Vs. STATE (DELHI ADMINISTRATION), DELHI,

JUDGEMENT

(1.) MOHINDER Kumar alias Mohinder Pal. Mool Chand and Jeet Ram alias Jeeta were committed to Sessions for trial under Sections 304/326/323/34 of the I.P.C. When the trial was being held by Shri S. R. Joel, learned Additional Sessions Judge, and some prosecution evidence had been recorded, it was found by him that Jagan Lal Goel and Abdul Majid (the present petitioners) were also liable to be prosecuted qua the same of fences as there was sufficient material to proceed against them. Both these petitioners were accordingly summoned by the learned trial Judge and charge sheet was also later framed against them. When after the charge, evidence was being recorded afresh, the newly added accused i.e. the present petitioners, made an application to the trial court that the proceedings against them could not be continued, as they had not been committed to Sessions, but had been illegally summoned. They accordingly prayed for their discharge. The said application was dismissed by Shri Goel with the observation that Section 193 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 is controlled by the general provisions embodied in Section 319 of the said Code.

(2.) BOTH Abdul Majid and Jagan Lal Goel, the newly added accused, have come to this Court under Section 482 of the Code for the quashing of the proceedings qua them.

(3.) THE learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the Court below has misdirected Itself by holding that Section 193 is subject to the provisions contained in Section 319 of the Code. Both the sections are reproduced below: -