Powers of the Sessions Court

you mean that the it is session trial,

then the session court direct add the person as additional accsued u/s 319, The word court is meant where the trial commenced

I agree with kapoor

Lower court took cognizance against R1 only and let off R2, R3 and R4. R1 died after staying the case in hon HC. Then I took it to hon, Sessions as CLRP against the Lower court order. Then R2 also died. Remaining two R3 and R4 are not human beings but companies, who are ready to spend any money, because they can only be fined and not imprisoned. When I prayed for impleading a new person as R5, hon sessions ordered dismissing my request stating sec 319, to go to lower court.

Now, my questions are:

1) whether sessions court has or doesn't have powers under u/s 319 to implead a new accused in between ? or

2) it has the powers, but doesn't want to use it ?

3) If I go to lower court, can I ask the sessions court to keep the present CLRP in abeyance, till the lower court disposes it off against the new accused say R5. If so under what section the sessions court can wait ?

4) If I go to hon HC, what is the guarantee that it will not also ask me to go back to lower court ?

please let me first under which section the trial is going on to know It is lower court trial or session trial.

Thereby we can post our opnion

u/s 425
 

Kapoor Sir,

Thanks for the kind advices.

Cr PC  Sec 319

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 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 trader arrest or upon a summon, 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 subsection (1) then-

        (a) The proceedings in respect of such person shall be commenced afresh, and 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.

The cognizance is has to be taken against the case not against the accused persons, so once the appropriate court takes cognizance there is no need for it. In this case the sessions court should issue summon against the accused person for his appearance . 

Sir, It is right logically. But, the procedure according to Cr PC has to be adhered.to.

when the sessions court takes up the trial and finds that some one else is also an accused in the said case it can straight away proceed against such suspect there is no necessity for the matter bing sent for commital court as the offence was already taken cognisance by the commital court

Sir, Is there any section in Cr PC that allows the summoning of the new accused ? Or is there any case citation on this matter? 

My case is even more simpler. Because the Police Investigation was also already over even on the new accused along with others. Just because that person had retired from service and had gone away to his native place, my earlier lawyer didn't include his name in the original PCR.

Now because, R1 and R2 have died and R3 and R4 are only office designations, it has become necessary to call the new person (say R5), because only a living person is more interested in solving or ending a case, than a office.

Being PSUs, the R3 and R4  aren't bothered to spend any amount of money on lawyers, even though they are spending more than the amount due to me itself. Kindly help sir.

Respected Sirs, On re-reading sec 319 of Cr PC, I find that it is mainly addressed to the lower courts only. If it was applicable to Sessions Court, they would have mentioned as ' to be sent to lower court for trial'.

Can you kindly give your valuable opinions sirs. ?
 

Respected sir

I want to know is it possible that high court will discharge from the act 304b if i will file the criminal revision