Sessions judge can summon those not named as accused: SC

Clearing the air in the wake of conflicting verdicts on the issue, the Supreme Court today held that the sessions courts have power to summon as accused even those persons, who are not named as offenders in the charge sheet, if their complicity is evident from records during the proceedings.
A five-judge Constitution bench headed by Chief Justice Altamas Kabir gave its verdict to clear the legal position in view of conflicting judgements of two different three-judge bench of the apex court on the power to summon as accused those whose prosecution has not been recommended by police in the charge sheet.

While one bench, in Ranjit Singh's case, had held that that a sessions judge, after receiving a case on committal by a magistrate, cannot summon the persons as accused against whom police did not prefer prosecution. The other bench, in the Kishun Singh's case, had taken the contrary view.
"We have no hesitation in agreeing with the views expressed in Kishun Singh's case that the Session Courts has jurisdiction on committal of a case to it, to take cognizance of the offences of the persons not named as offenders but whose complicity in the case would be evident from the materials available on record.

"Hence, even without recording evidence, upon committal under Section 209 of CrPC, the Session Judge may summon those persons shown in column 2 of the police report to stand trial along with those already named therein," the bench also comprising justices S S Nijjar, Ranjan Gogoi, M Y Eqbal and Vikramajit Sen said in a unanimous judgement.
Usually, police put the names of the persons in column no.2 of the charge sheet against whom they though find the criminality but could not get sufficient evidence to try them as accused.
The bench said, "The session judge was entitled to issue summons under Section 193 CrPC upon the case being committed to him by the magistrate.