The Lucknow Bench of the Allahabad High Court while allowing an application said that to assign the reason and giving subjective satisfaction while passing any order is the first and foremost requirement of the order passed by any Court or the Competent Authority inasmuch as the reasons and satisfaction of the court concerned is backbone of any order, without which, such order may not stand.
A Single Bench of Justice Rajesh Singh Chauhan passed this order while hearing an application under section 482 filed by Naseem.
By means of the petition filed under Section 482 CrPC, the petitioner has prayed for the following reliefs:-
“(i) Wherefore, it is most respectfully prayed that the Court may kindly be pleased to quash/ set aside the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Case under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149, 34, 504 & 506 I.P.C, Police Station-Mandhata, District-Pratapgarh against the applicant/ petitioner, so for as it relates to the petitioner.
(ii) And it is further prayed that the Court may kindly be pleased to stay the operation and implementation of the order dated 15.12.2023 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Pratapgarh in Case under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148, 149, 34, 504 & 506 I.P.C, Police Station-Mandhata, District-Pratapgarh against the applicant/ petitioner, so for as it relates to the petitioner, during pendency of the aforesaid petition, in the interest of justice.”
A.M Tripathi, counsel for the petitioner has stated that since the gravity of Section 319 Cr.P.C is treated to be on a high pedestal and as per the trite law, the trial court may exercise such powers sparingly and in a rare circumstances, unless the trial court finds that there is cogent and relevant material available on the record which suggest that the allegations against a person is such, he may be summoned under Section 319 CrPC.
The person who is summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C is a person against whom the F.I.R has not been lodged and the charge-sheet has not been filed.
Therefore, as per Tripathi, the Apex Court has held that while summoning such person invoking powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C the specific reason of his summoning should be indicated in the order passed under Section 319 Cr.P.C and it should have also been indicated in that order clearly as to what are those sections for which he has been summoned so that at the time of affording an opportunity of hearing, she/ he can defend herself/ himself properly.
Aniruddha Kumar Singh, Additional Government Advocate-I has fairly submitted that so far as the technical ground was raised by Tripathi, counsel for the petitioner that the order dated 15.12.2023 is nonspeaking and unreasoned order where the trial court has not indicated its subjective satisfaction as to why the petitioner should be summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.c and what are those sections under which his trial would be required, he has nothing to say and on that submission any appropriate order may be passed in the interest of justice.
However, he has submitted that if the merits of the case is touched, it is visible in the impugned order itself that on the basis of examination of the injured witness the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C has been invoked by the trial court and the testimony of the injured witness is also considered on high pedestal and such testimony of the injured witness should not be ignored by the trial court.
He has also submitted that if pursuant to the impugned summoning order the petitioner appears before the court concerned and convinces the court that he has been falsely implicated and during the course of investing nothing incriminating material / evidences have been found, rather, as per the CCTV Footage and the statement of other persons his implication is false, he may establish before the court and the trial court may pass appropriate order, but at least, the testimony of the injured witness should not be ignored.
“Having heard counsel for the parties and having perused the material available on record as well as having regard to the dictums of Apex Court as considered above, I find that the trial court while passing the impugned order dated 15.12.2023 has not indicated its subjective satisfaction as to why the petitioner should be summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C and under which sections the trial of the petitioner would be required. To assign the reason and give subjective satisfaction while passing any order is the first and foremost requirement of the order passed by any Court or the Competent Authority inasmuch as the reasons and satisfaction of the court concerned is backbone of any order, without which, such order may not stand.
At the same time, if the person summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C is not apprised as to what are those sections under which his trial would be required, he would have failed to defend himself properly and in that case the principles of natural justice of that person would be frustrated. Any order bereft of the reasoning would be nullity in the eyes of law”, the Court observed while allowing the petition.
Therefore, on the aforesaid ground alone the order dated 15.12.2023 is not liable to be sustained, hence, the same is set aside and quashed by the High Court.