KANT TRIPATHI,J. - (1.) HEARD the learned counsel for the revisionist and the learned AGA for the State and perused the record.
(2.) THE revisionist Smt. Aneeta has preferred this revision against the order dated 27.7.2009 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 7, Badaun in ST No. 583 of 2007 whereby the learned Additional Sessions Judge has summoned the revisionist under Section 319, Cr.P.C. to face trial for the offence under Section 307 read with Section 34, I.P.C. alongwith other accused. The learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that the impugned order is based on the statement of P.W. 1 Ramesh Chandra who was examined during the trial but was not cross-examined. The learned Additional Sessions Judge placing reliance on the statement of P.W. 1 Ramesh Chandra recorded during the examination-in-chief, has passed the impugned order. It was further submitted that the summoning order could be passed under Section 319, Cr.P.C. only after cross-examination of the witnesses. In this connection the learned counsel for the revisionist placed reliance on Mohd. Shaft v. Mohd. Rafiq and another, 2007 (58) ACC 254. In that case the Apex Court has held that before a Court exercises its discretionary jurisdiction in terms of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, it must arrive at the satisfaction that there exists a possibility that the accused so summoned is in all likelihood would be convicted. Such satisfaction can be arrived at inter alia upon completion of the cross-examination of the witness. For the said purpose, the Court concerned may also like to consider other evidence.
(3.) IT is settled law that the power under Section 319, Cr.P.C. can be exercised either on an application made to the Court or by the Court suo moto. The Court has power under Section 319, Cr.P.C. to proceed against any person not shown to an accused if it appears from the evidence that such person has also committed an offence for which he can be tried together with the accused. The main object underlying Section 319, Cr.P.C. is that the whole case against all accused should be tried and disposed of not only expeditiously but also simultaneously. Justice and convenience both require that cognizance against the newly added accused should be taken in the same case and in the same manner as against the original accused. It is, therefore, a matter of discretion of the Court to summon an accused under Section 319, Cr.P.C.;