IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 09TH DAY OF DECEMBER, 2019 BEFORE THE HON’BLE MR.JUSTICE G.NARENDAR CRL.P.NO.8224/2019 BETWEEN 1. SRI GURUPRASAD S/O. CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 26 YEARS, OCCUPATION POST MASTER, R/AT KASUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571301.
2. SRI. CHANDRAPPA S/O. SUBBAPPA, AGED ABOUT 62 YEARS, OCCUPATION AGRICULTURIST, R/AT KASUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571301.
3. SMT. MANGALAMMA W/O. CHANDRAPPA, AGED ABOUT 52 YEARS, OCCUPATION HOUSEHOLD, R/AT KASUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571301.
4. SRI. GURUPAD S/O. SUBBAPPA, AGED ABOUT 60 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/AT KASUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT-571301.
(BY SMT. RASHMI JADHAV, ADV.) AND 1. THE STATE OF KARNATAKA BY NANJANGUD RURAL P.S., REPRESENTED BY STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT BUILDING, BANGALORE-560 001.
2. SRI. VEERENDRA K. G. S/O. GURUMALLAPPA, AGED ABOUT 39 YEARS, OCCUPATION: AGRICULTURIST, R/AT KASUVANAHALLI VILLAGE, NANJANGUD TALUK, MYSORE DISTRICT.
(BY SMT. K.P.YASHODHA, HCGP FOR R1.) ...PETITIONERS …RESPONDENTS THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482 CR.P.C PRAYING TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER DATED 01.10.2019 PASSED BY THE V ADDITIONAL SESSIONS JUDGE, MUSURU IN S.C.NO.276/2018 THEREBY ORDERING FOR ISSUE OF SUMMONS TO THE PETITIONERS AS PROPOSED ACCUSED NO.3 TO 6.
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION COMING ON FOR ADMISSION THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER 1. Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioners and the learned HCGP.
2. Petitioners are before this Court being aggrieved by the order dated 01.10.2019 passed by the V Addl. Sessions Judge, Mysuru, in S.C.No.276/2018, whereby the Court has been pleased to allow the application preferred by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr.PC and directed issuance of summons to the proposed accused.
3. Learned Counsel for the petitioners contends that the same is erroneous and that the application under Section 319 Cr.PC could have been allowed only after affording an opportunity to the proposed accused-petitioners herein and that the order allowing the application under Section 319 Cr.PC is contrary to the law laid down by this Court in Crl.R.P.No.1045/2017 c/w Crl.R.P.No.1055/2017.
4. Section 319 of Cr.PC reads as under:
“319. Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence (1) Where, in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence, it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence for which such person could be tried together with the accused, the court may proceed against the such person for the offence which he appears to have committed.
(2) Where such person is not attending the court, he may be arrested or summoned, as the circumstances of the case may require, for the purpose aforesaid.
(3) Any person attending the court, although not under arrest or upon a summons, may be detained by such court for the purpose of the inquiry into, or trial of, the offence which he appears to have committed.
(4) Where the court proceeds against any person under sub-section (1), then-
(a) the proceedings in respect of such person shall be commenced afresh, and the witnesses re-heard;
(b) subject to the provisions of clause (a), the case may proceed as if such person had been an accused person when the court took cognizance of the offence upon which the inquiry or trial was commenced.”
5. From a reading of the aforesaid section, it is apparent that the statute does not visualize of affording an opportunity of hearing to the persons whom the court finds it fit and proper to array as an accused.
6. In the instant case, the court has looked into the complaint and the examination-in-chief of PW-1 – Veerendra, wherein the overtacts attributed to the petitioners is set out in detail by the witness.
7. Be that as it may, though the order states that the application is allowed, the Court has not arrayed the petitioners as accused, but has directed issuance of summons to the “proposed accused 3 to 6”, which would indicate that the court below is yet to arraign them as accused. Hence, it is open to the petitioners to appear before the Court and submit their say and thereafter, if the Court deems it fit, it shall take cognizance of the offences made out against them. No ground is made out. Petition stands dismissed.
Sd/- JUDGE KK CT-HR