Date: 29 July 2023

The Supreme Court of India restored the order passed by the Trial Court in the case of Sandeep Kumar vs. State of Haryana, holding that the merits of the evidence should only be considered during the trial and not at the stage of Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC).

Background: 

An application under Section 319 CrPC was moved before the Trial Court, seeking to add the accused, Sandeep Kumar, to the ongoing trial. The Trial Court allowed the application, adding him as an accused in the case. However, Sandeep Kumar filed a revision petition in the High Court, challenging this order.

High Court's Decision: 

The High Court set aside the Trial Court's order based on its reasoning that Sandeep Kumar had been found innocent during the investigation. The High Court also considered the fact that he never used a gun and had actually fled from the crime scene. Consequently, it concluded that he should not have been added as an accused in the case.

Supreme Court's Ruling: 

Upon hearing the appeal against the High Court's decision, the Apex Court firmly stated that the High Court's approach was not correct. The Supreme Court emphasized that the assessment of the evidence's merits should only take place during the trial, through cross-examination of witnesses and court scrutiny. This should not be done at the stage of Section 319 CrPC, as was done by the High Court in this case.

The Apex Court highlighted the importance of the charges faced by Sandeep Kumar, which included serious sections of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) such as 458, 460, 323, 285, 302, 148, and 149. The Court clarified that for attracting the offence under Section 149 IPC, one simply has to be a part of an unlawful assembly, and no specific individual role or act is required to be assigned to a member of such an assembly.

The Supreme Court further explained that the purpose of a criminal trial is to ascertain the truth of the matter, and if the Court is satisfied that there is evidence indicating an accused's involvement in an offence, it can proceed against that person. At the stage of summoning an accused, the Court's satisfaction must be prima facie. In this case, there was evidence from an eyewitness who clearly stated before the Court that Sandeep Kumar was involved in the crime. The Court noted that there was no need to cross-examine this witness at the Section 319 stage, and the trial could proceed with the fresh inclusion of Sandeep Kumar as an accused.

Conclusion: 

The Supreme Court's ruling in the case of Sandeep Kumar vs. State of Haryana clarifies that the merits of the evidence should not be assessed at the Section 319 CrPC stage. The Court emphasized that the purpose of criminal trial is to determine the truth, and once there is evidence indicating an accused's involvement in the offence, the trial can proceed against them. The decision highlights the importance of considering the evidence at the appropriate stage and ensures a fair and just trial for all parties involved.