During trial, an application was made by respondent No.2 under Section 190 of the Cr.P.C. for taking cognizance against the Petitioner as his name was also mentioned as one of the co-accused in the audit report as well as the report lodged by Branch Manager of the Samiti, Gharghoda. The said application was, however, rejected by the trial Court vide its order dated 09.10.2002 observing, inter alia, that no materials are available on record so as to hold the Petitioner's involvement and observed further that a proceeding would be initiated against him under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. if his involvement is found through prosecution witnesses. The said order is affirmed further by the Revisional Court vide its order dated 27.02.2003 in a Criminal Revision No.288/02 preferred by respondent No.2.
HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH, BILASPUR CRMP No. 1283 of 2016 Reserved on 19.07.2019 Pronounced on 31.07.2019
Sir, thats the judgment where an Accused No.1 tried crpc 190 petition first to array other person as co accused. then the court asks him to wait till his involvment found in prosecution witness. And after prosecution witness
the accused filed crpc 319 application to array other person as co accused and sessions court allowed it. And then the NEW ACCUSED approached high court to dismiss the order but high court upheld the order of sessions court.
Dear Learned members, please enlighen on this