MUNNA SINGH Vs. STATE OF BIHAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This application has been filed for quashing the order dated 6-9-2000 passed by the 3rd Additional Sessions Judge, Munger in Sessions Case No. 685 of 1998 whereby in exercise of power under S. 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure it had summoned the petitioners to face trial in a case under S. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act.

(2.) On the basis of a report given to the police, Mehus P. S. Case No. 219/97 dated 29-8-1997 was registered under S. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act in which petitioners Munna Singh and Arun Singh are named as accused in the First Information Report, besides Amir Singh and Ranjit Singh. The police, after investigation, submitted charge sheet dated 18-3-1998 against the aforesaid two persons under S. 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code and 27 of the Arms Act but kept the investigation pending in respect of these two petitioners. Lateron, police submitted final report and did not sent up the petitioners for trial. Case was ultimately committed to the Court of Session. During the trial, P.W. 1 Raja Ram Singh was examined and after his examination, prosecution filed an application for summoning these petitioners to face trial in exercise of the power under S. 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the 'Code'). Eighth Additional Sessions Judge, Munger, by order dated 6-9-2000 passed in Sessions Case No. 685 of 1998, acceded to the prayer of the prosecution and issued summons to the petitioners to face trial under S. 319 of the Code. While doing so, he has not only referred to the evidence collected during the course of trial but also referred to the statements of the witnesses examined during the course of investigation and the statements of the witnesses recorded under S. 164 of the Code. The learned Judge observed that the participation of the petitioners in the crime is very much apparent from the materials on the record and it further observed that

(3.) Mr. Madhup, appearing on behalf of the petitioners submits that while exercising the power under S. 319 of the Code, the Court cannot look into the materials collected during the course of investigation for summoning a person not being the accused. According to him, Court has to confine itself to the evidence recorded during the course of trial. In support of his submission, Mr. Madhup has placed reliance on a judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Chandra Deo Singh v. Prakash Chandra Bose alias Chabi Bose, AIR 1963 SC 1430 and my attention has been drawn to the following passage from paragraph 10 of the judgment which reads as follows :-