gr: THE HIGH comm OF KARNATAKA
CERCUIT BENCH AT GULBARGA V
mrrgn THIS THE 24TH DAY OF' ,m1,gY, 2908' * ~ f. "
BEFQRE é _ " 4' 1 'V 1'
'THE HON'BE..E MR. JUS'FiV (};'?{..b£1{l'€1'k'¥§:\lDV!*§
CrI.I42.P. No.25€}6/2_é08
Between: V " '
1. Hanamanthagouda, ._ - -. »
S/o.Kashiray Nyamgouda, _ V
Age 65 yrs, 0ce11;l§gxic'§u}t1;x1};.:
2. Saiaebgtiuiiflgir % :1:
S/o.S§1ivanagc1:d..a 'Pam, _ _
Age 55".yrsf , 0(,§'€.$'t.E;'f'P..'i:;I'i=f:41V1§1t_fl'1i'-'Q,
Both am r/o.Kr;iij9 1 v1'lla g_cV,,7_ "
Tq. 8:. fiistfifiapur. A * V .. Petitioners
.....
V The StaAts:-, %of Ka m' ' "
Thmugh 4?SE "of Bableshwar
~ : ?Q}ViCC Static-;1_,'i~Tq. $5 Disttfiijapur. .. Respondent
gfijaranabasappa K Babshetty, HCGP)
This criminal revision petition filed under Section 397
' V . _ n_fad*With Section 401 ef Cr.P'C, praying to set aside the order
._pa*ascd by the Principal Sessions Judge, Bijapur, dated
21.4.2008 on application U/S.3I.9 CIZPC in Sessions Case
No.1 E9] 2066 summoning the petitioners to face the ma}. (Q
N \ -tfx/i"" E/my '3
2
This criminal revision petition coming on for admissio
this day, the Court made the following:
ORDER
The leaxned HCGP takes notice for respogxdent;-I” . “2
2. Though the matter is listed for
up for final disposal with the consent of V’
parties.
:3. in so No.119]2G{}54._z:”pefidirgg.Vl’. ofienees
punishable ~u:n.<,1:e'1j. '–€#9$§(A}w,… 306, 201 readwith
Section 34 em and 3, 4 and 6 1;) P Act, the
learned made an application under
Section CLPC xtoe-.s:1;'n1z:;on petitioners as accused in the
éhoee: trial judge arrayed the petitioners
as the following order:
“P32 ‘Al?-*4 absent. Others present. E? filed.
‘They exempted for the day. PP files an
A.a§.r_’p1ication 1}/S.319 Cr.PC. Issue notices to the
A proposed accused. CaIIo1:12().5.2O{)8”
Vf’l’I:1e peiitionexs appeared before the trial Court and
were released on bail. Subsequently, the case was
posted for flaming of charges against petitioners. The
T\},
5
1
“\…p.3
impugned order is like cryptic. it is need1ess_.at§eHllst2eit;t:.:
powers under Section 319 Cr.P. has 5 to = b e:slex:;ise£l” V» ‘V
sparingly in exceptional cases. Tlge ‘baa
not stated reasons as to W113? gxetitieizefs sh<:'aj1lt1&* L.
as accused. The learned Iiudge lefened to
contents of applicatio1fil::4_.'fi¥c'd :' PC. The
learned sessiona the application
was filed on ilaf in examination-in-
chief. aw
in a decisien (Criminal) 531, the
Supreme has A S
A _ '(}'13.~:.–".:-ge, as noticed by us, in
-of seet1e3;i”~f$19 of the Code of Criminal
.Al.l’VV’requi1*ed to arrive at his
8atj9f”ag4:’Vf.iO11v,. lie through that the matter
sllould reeeéyev his due consideration only after
‘c:nf_ss~e3(ami:1ation of the witnesses is over,
_V –..exeei5fion tfaereto could be taken far less at
V. ‘instance of a wimess and when the State
. V A unot 3§g1’i6VCd by the Sam’? 4/QR. 5/ \
, C’ 3
13. From the decisions of this Court,
noticeé above, it is evident that before a
exercises its discretionary jt11’isdi§c$tiori’i1;1′-1″.eI’msV_” «.
of section 319 of the (3ode”‘1′.of’,’.’iC:ri!I11Ii’
Procedure, it must arrive atvfheusatief.aetien zliatg
there exists a possibility theit» aceizsede 5.0
sumnzxoned is in all_ VV””J?.(}13l}d
convicted. Such safisfiaeiiori. at
inter aiia upgn ef i_r:vr’oss-
examination 3 «:33? 3: varitneeé; said
purpose the like to
consider othfir tifierefoxe of the
View an error
in petssingi t]:Vie:’.” iudgment. it is
acconimgy is-:1 ésiécg aippeal is allowed.”
in the impugned order cannot be
.3;-suit, revision petition is accepted. The
& brie; is aside.
Sd/-
Judge