Person summoned under Section 319 CrPC need not be given opportunity of hearing before being added as accused: Supreme Court

The Supreme Court recently held that it is not mandatory to give an opportunity of hearing to a person summoned under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code 1973 (CrPC) before such person is added by the trial court as an accused to the trial. [Yashodhan Singh and Others v. State of Uttar Pradesh and Another].A division bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan clarified that such a right of inquiry or hearing would accrue only to a person who has already been discharged under Section 227 of CrPC in the very same proceeding prior to the commencement of the trial.."The lateral entry of a person summoned in exercise of power under Section 319 CrPC is only to face the trial along with other accused. This, being a salutary provision in order to meet the ends of justice, the same cannot be diluted by importing within the scope of Section 319 CrPC principles of natural justice which in any case would be followed during the trial ... the principle of hearing a person who is summoned cannot be read into Section 319 CrPC. Such a procedure is not at all contemplated therein," the Court said..This Section does not contemplate the inclusion of such natural justice principles since a persons is only being summoned so he can face trial, the Court observed. "There is no finality attached to Section 319 CrPC. It only indicates commencement of trial qua the added accused. The rationale is that a person need not be heard before being added on arrayed as an accused," the Court explained. The Court also added that a person who has been summoned under Section 319, CrPC cannot insist on being heard first before being added as an accused and, thereby, call for a mini trial within the trial."A person who is summoned in exercise of the power under Section 319 CrPC cannot hijack the trial so to say and deviate from its focus and take it to a tangent in order to bolster his own case in a bid to escape trial," the Court said. .The Court was dealing with an appeal challenging a trial court order summoning certain persons (appellants) in a criminal case. The names of the appellants were not part of the chargesheet. However, in 2022, the trial court summoned the appellants under Section 319, CrPC. The Allahabad High Court later upheld this summons order, prompting the appellants to move the Supreme Court for relief. .Before the Supreme Court, the appellants contended that they ought to be given an opportunity of hearing before they are added as an accused following an order of summons under Section 319, CrPC..On this aspect, the appellants placed substantial reliance on the Supreme Court's observations in the case of Jogendra Yadav and Others v. State of Bihar and Another (2015).However, Justices Nagarathna and Bhuyan found that the observations in the Jogendra Yadav case concerned the peculiar facts of the case. The bench proceeded to rely on other case laws including Brijendra Singh and Others v. State of Rajasthan (2017) to ultimately dismiss the appeal. ."Merely because in certain proceedings the persons summoned had been provided an opportunity of being heard cannot be the same thing as stating that it is a mandatory requirement or a precondition that at the time of summoning a person under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C., he should be given an opportunity of being heard. That is not the mandate of law," the Court held. .The Court concluded that there is no procedure contemplated for an inquiry or an opportunity of being heard before a summoned person is added as an accused in a criminal trial, unless such a summon person has already been discharged. ."The contention that a summoned person must be given an opportunity of being heard before being added as an accused to face the trial is clearly not contemplated under Section 319 Cr.P.C," the Court said. .It, therefore, dismissed the appeal. .[Read Judgment]