W.P. (Cr.) No. 273 of 2005. Case: Shyamdeo Modi Vs State of Jharkhand and anr.. Jharkhand High CEGAT & CESTAT High Court
| Case Number | W.P. (Cr.) No. 273 of 2005 |
| Counsel | For Petitioner: Mahesh Tiwari, Adv. and For State: R.R. Mishra G.P. - II. |
| Judges | Amareshwar Sahay, J. |
| Issue | Criminal Procedure Code (2 of 1974) - Section 319 |
| Citation | 2006 CriLJ 4195 |
| Judgement Date | May 16, 2006 |
| Court | Jharkhand High CEGAT & CESTAT High Court |
Order:
-
Heard the parties.
-
The prayer of the petitioner in this writ application is to quash the order dated 14-7-2005 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, VIII, Fast Track Court, Giridih whereby and whereunder, the learned Trial Court, in exercise of the powers under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code allowed the prayer of the prosecution to summon Shyamdeo Modi i.e. the present petitioner to stand trial along with other accused persons on the ground that there was ample evidence on the record to show that Shyamdeo Modi was a man behind the curtain and had played a vital role in commission of the alleged crime and Shyamdeo Modi appeared to be guilty of offence of kidnapping of the minor boy Amit Kumar alias Tinku.
-
The facts which are relevant for the purpose of this application are that one Bhagwan Lal Burnwal lodged the First Information Report on 5-2-2004 regarding kidnapping of his minor son Amit Kumar alias Tinku, aged about 11 years. The said F.I.R. was registered under Section 364-A of the Indian Indian Penal Code against unknown persons. After completion of the investigation, the charge-sheet under Section 364-A/120-B/34 of the Indian Indian Penal Code was submitted by the Police against six persons namely Bablu Modi, Laxman Modi, Santosh Kumar, Ashok Mandal, Gaurav Mukherjee and Lalit Sen. Thereafter, the case was committed to the Court of Session and in course of Trial, out of five charge-sheet witnesses, four were examined including the victim boy Amit Kumar alias Tinku who, in course of investigation, was recovered.
-
It is after examination of the victim boy Amit Kumar alias Tinku, a petition under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was filed on behalf of the prosecution to summon Shyamdeo Modi (petitioner herein) to stand trial because from the evidence during trial, it appeared that Shyamdeo Modi had played vital role in kidnapping the minor boy Amit Kumar alias Tinku for ransom.
-
By the impugned Order dated 14-7-2005, as stated earlier, the Trial Court allowed the said petition of the prosecution and issued summons against Shyamdeo Modi directing him to appear and face trial. It is against this order, the petitioner has filed the present application for quashing.
-
Mr. Mahesh Tiwari, learned counsel for the petitioner has vehemently argued that the impugned order summoning the petitioner to face trial in exercise of the powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. was absolutely bad in law in view of the law settled by the Hon'ble Supreme Court. Elaborating his arguments, Mr. Mahesh Tiwari submitted that when the trial was at its fag end, then at that stage, the Trial Court could not and should not have exercised the powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. for summoning the accused to face...
To continue reading
Request your trial