KARAN SINGH Vs. STATE OF M P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) AGGRIEVED by the order dated 4.12.2000 of the Special Judge, Gwalior, in Sessions Trial No. 129/2000, refusing his prayer to implead the respondents No. 2 to 8 as co accused under section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, the complainant petitioner has preferred this revision petition.

(2.) BRIEF facts leading to this petition are that three persons were facing trial before the learned Special Judge for commission of offences under sections 302, 307/34 and 120B of the Indian Penal Code. In that case, besides Karan Singh, who was the complainant and brother of the deceased, prosecution had cited four other persons, viz., (1) Maniram, (2) Jagdish, (3) Indrajit and (4) Chandan Singh, as witnesses. In their statements, these four persons, had named the respondents No. 2 to 8 also as accomplices. The incident was said to have taken place on 31.10.1998 and the statements of the said witnesses were recorded for the first time on 26.9.1999. The trial of the said three persons is almost over and now the case is at the stage of judgment. It was after the examination of ten witnesses that the application under section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure was moved by the prosecution and thereafter, only three more witnesses have been examined and the evidence was over.

(3.) WITH respect to addition of co accused persons in the trial, Hon'ble the Supreme Court in case of Michael Machado and another v. Central Bureau of Investigation and another [2000(2) Crimes 23 (SC)] has laid down that the discretionary power under the provisions of section 319, CrPC, should be invoked to achieve criminal justice. 'A judicial exercise is called for, keeping a conspectus of the case, including the stage at which the trial has proceeded already and the quantum of evidence collected till then, and also the amount of time which the Court had spent for collecting such evidence. It must be remembered that there is no compelling duty on the Court to proceed against other persons."