The Patna High Court has quashed a trial court order that had summoned a Bhagalpur resident to face trial in a murder case nearly seven years after the incident. Justice Ansul held that the evidence relied upon by the sessions court did not meet the legal standard required for invoking Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC), which allows courts to add new accused during an ongoing trial.
Background of the Case
The case arose from the killing of Bishwanath Kumar Gupta in Bhagalpur in June 2012. According to the prosecution, the victim was shot by unidentified persons while returning from a tea stall and later succumbed to his injuries. The FIR initially did not name Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Sah as an accused.
During the investigation, statements were recorded and several developments followed. Eventually, police submitted a final report that did not proceed against Deepak Kumar. However, during the trial, the Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bhagalpur, invoked Section 319 CrPC and summoned him to face trial through an order dated August 22, 2019.
Challenging that order, Deepak Kumar approached the High Court.
Court Examines Evidence on Record
The High Court closely examined the depositions of prosecution witnesses that were available before the trial court when the summoning order was passed. Justice Ansul noted that out of eleven witnesses examined, ten had not made any statement implicating the petitioner. Several witnesses had even turned hostile.
The principal reliance of the trial court was on the testimony of the deceased's mother, who stated during examination-in-chief that Deepak Kumar had allegedly paid money to have her son killed. However, during cross-examination, she admitted that this information had come from a newspaper report and was not based on her personal knowledge.
The High Court observed that the trial court failed to consider this crucial aspect of her testimony before issuing summons.
Court Observation on Section 319 CrPC
Justice Ansul referred extensively to Supreme Court precedents governing Section 319 CrPC and reiterated that the power is extraordinary in nature and must be exercised sparingly. The Court emphasized that a person can be summoned during trial only when strong and cogent evidence emerges from testimony recorded before the court.
The judgment also noted that statements recorded during investigation under Section 164 CrPC are not substantive evidence by themselves and can only be used for corroboration or contradiction after witnesses testify in court. According to the High Court, such statements cannot form the sole basis for summoning a person under Section 319.
“The foundational trigger for Section 319 must be the evidence produced on oath in the trial itself,” the Court observed while discussing the legal principles laid down by the Supreme Court.
Findings on the Trial Court's Order
After reviewing the witness depositions, the High Court concluded that the material relied upon by the sessions court fell far short of the threshold required for invoking Section 319 CrPC.
Justice Ansul observed that a statement based merely on information allegedly gathered from a newspaper report could not constitute strong evidence warranting the addition of a new accused in a murder trial. The Court noted that such material would not even be sufficient for framing charges, let alone summoning a person under the stricter standard prescribed for Section 319 proceedings.
The Court further remarked that the circumstances surrounding the case reflected serious concerns and stated that the prosecution against the petitioner appeared to have been pursued in a manner that was “apparently” mala fide.
Decision
Allowing the petition, the Patna High Court set aside the order dated August 22, 2019, by which Deepak Kumar had been summoned as an accused under Section 319 CrPC.
Quashing the order, Justice Ansul held that the evidence relied upon by the trial court was “extremely insufficient” for exercising such extraordinary power and that the summoning order could not be sustained in law.
Case Details:
Case Title: Deepak Kumar @ Deepak Sah v. State of Bihar
Case Number: Criminal Miscellaneous No. 56895 of 2019
Judge: Justice Ansul
Decision Date: 27 May 2026
