RADHEYSHYAM Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The learned Third Additional Sessions Judge, Morena in Sessions Trial No. 269/94 passed an order dated 10-5-1995 directing therein that the petitioner be summoned for trial, who was not committed to the Court of Session. The impugned order was passed invoking the provisions of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner pointed out in this petition under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure that the trial Court had no power under Section 319 Cr. P.C. to summons an accused to face the trial, who was not committed by the Magistrate after enquiry.

(3.) Learned counsel for the complainant relied on two cases of the Apex Court on this point, in which the Supreme court had considered the scope of Sections 193 and 319 Cr. P.C. and held that scope of Section 193 includes the power of the Court of Session to summon an accused, who is left over by the investigating agency and by the Magistrate in the committal order before commencement of the trial. The two Sections 193 and 319 were considered in the case of Kishun Singh v. State of Bihar, reported in 1993 SCC (Cri) 470 : (1993 Cri LJ 1700). The Apex court held thus :-