OM PAL Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Case called out in the revised list.

(2.) In this connection, Learned Counsel for the revisionist has challenged this order on the ground that powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. are to be exercised during trial and not after conclusion of the trial.

(3.) In the present case before us, trial of other accused Om Pal has been concluded, sentence imposed and fine has been pronounced against him. As such, it cannot said be to be a stage of inquiry or trial rather it is the stage of delivery of judgment when the trial is almost over after hearing both the parties, the learned lower Court has pronounced its verdict. A bare perusal of the order passed by the learned lower Court clearly shows that it has directed that the accused so summoned to be separately tried and separate file be prepared for his trial. It appears that exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has been done at the stage of delivery of judgment, learned lower Court has failed to take note of necessary ingredients that there must be pendency of trial and the evidence adduced must create impression to the Court that it appears that the accused so called is involved in the offence and he is to be tried with other accused and trial is pending. As such, the exercise of power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. has not been made at appropriate stage of trial.