Today, i.e. on 14th March 2019, in the matter of Periyasami and Ors. v. S. Nallasamy, the Hon’ble Supreme Court pronounced that mere disclosure of names is not enough for summoning persons u/s 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code, especially when such names are not mentioned by the complainant at the first opportunity.
The Hon’ble Supreme Court observed that:
The additional accused cannot be summoned under Section 319 of the Code in casual and cavalier manner in the absence of strong and cogent evidence. (Para 14)
Under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code additional accused can be summoned only if there is more than prima facie case as is required at the time of framing of charge but which is less than the satisfaction required at the time of conclusion of the trial convicting the accused. (Para 14)
Under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code, mere disclosure of names of persons cannot be said to be strong and cogent evidence to make them to stand trial for the offence, especially when their names or other identity were not disclosed at the first opportunity i.e. neither in the FIR nor in the Statements recorded under Section 161 of the Criminal Procedure Code. (This inference has been drawn on the basis of Para 15)
Copy of judgement: Judgement_14-Mar-2019