SARAT CHANDRA PRADHAN Vs. CHAKRADHAR PRADHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application in revision has been made by the first -informant and it arises out of G.R. Case No. 1080 of 1981 pending in the Court of the judicial Magistrate, First Class, Puri, instituted by the State. The hearing of the case was closed, arguments were heard and the case was posted for judgment. At that stage, the first informant made an application for addition of Sanatan Pradhan as an accused in the case. The learned judicial Magistrate observed that the petitioner had no locus standi to make the application in a case instituted by the State and even on merits, there was no case for addition of any person as an accused at that late stage. This order has been challenged by the petitioner in this revision. The opposite parties have not entered appearance and none has appeared for them.

(2.) AS held by the Supreme Court in AIR 1983 S. C. 67 : Municipal Corporation of Delhi v. Ram Kishan Rohtagi, Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure gives ample power to any Court to take cognisance and add any person not being an accused before it and try him along with other accused. But this is an extraordinary power which has been conferred on the Court and should be used very sparingly and only if compelling reasons exist for taking cognisance against the other person against whom action has not been taken. The State has made no application for addition of any person as an accused. Even on the basis of the materials placed before him, the learned Judicial Magistrate was of the view that there was no case for addition of Sanatan Pradhan as an accused in the case. The trial was over but for the judgment. At such belated stage, the first -informant chose to make an application. Such an application should not be entertained and rightly had not been entertained by the learned judicial Magistrate. - - I see no ground for interference. The revision is accordingly dismissed.