CrPC Section 319 – Summoning of Accused Dropped in Closure Report Valid if Strong Evidence Emerges During Trial
Case Name: Omi @ Omkar Rathore & Another v. State of Madhya Pradesh & Another
Citation: SLP (Crl.) No. 17781 of 2024; 2025 INSC 27
Date of Judgment: 3 January 2025
Bench: Justice J.B. Pardiwala and Justice R. Mahadevan
Held: The Supreme Court held that the trial court is empowered under Section 319 CrPC to summon persons named in the FIR but dropped in the closure report if strong and cogent evidence surfaces during trial. The closure report filed by the Investigating Officer does not prevent the court from summoning such persons. The power under Section 319 is discretionary and extraordinary, to be exercised sparingly but validly when the evidence adduced is more than a mere prima facie case.
Summary: An FIR was lodged on 20.02.2018 at Padav Police Station, Gwalior, under Sections 302, 307, 147, 148, and 149 IPC, naming seven persons including the petitioners. After investigation, the police filed a charge-sheet against some accused while filing a closure report against the petitioners for lack of evidence. During trial, PW-3 (the first informant) in his examination-in-chief reiterated the FIR version and attributed specific overt acts to the petitioners, alleging they fired upon the deceased with common intention. Relying on this testimony, the trial court allowed an application under Section 319 CrPC and summoned the petitioners to face trial along with other accused.
The petitioners challenged this order through a criminal revision, which was dismissed by the Madhya Pradesh High Court on 23.10.2024. Before the Supreme Court, they argued that the trial court should have considered the closure report exonerating them. The Court, however, held that closure reports are not determinative and that courts cannot be restrained from summoning accused if credible trial evidence points to their involvement. Referring to Hardeep Singh v. State of Punjab (2014) 3 SCC 92 and Ramesh Chandra Srivastava v. State of U.P. (2021) 12 SCC 608, it reaffirmed that evidence sufficient to establish more than a prima facie case—though not tested by cross-examination—can justify summoning under Section 319.
The Court also emphasized that closure reports should not be kept pending indefinitely and should be promptly considered by trial courts, but once fresh evidence surfaces, the report pales into insignificance.
Decision: The Supreme Court dismissed the petition, upheld the orders of the trial court and High Court summoning the petitioners under Section 319 CrPC, and clarified that they remain free to raise all contentions, including reliance on the closure report, before the trial court during the course of trial.