Coal scam: Manmohan Singh becomes second former PM to be summoned under Section 319

NEW DELHI: Manmohan Singh on Wednesday became the second former Prime Minister, the first being his mentor P V Narasimha Rao, to be summoned as an accused by a trial court and on both instances the summons were issued under Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code.

Rao was summoned as an accused in the Lakhubhai Pathak cheating case on July 9, 1996, by Chief Metropolitan Magistrate Prem Kumar, who in his order had philosophically said: "Time doth create existence; time destroys."

The time for destruction of Rao's political career had indeed begun with the summoning order. Soon, he found himself as an accused in two other cases - St Kitts forgery case and JMM MPs bribery case.

In both Lakhubhai Pathak cheating case and in coal scam, separated by nearly two decades, CBI was the investigating agency. Like in case of Rao, CBI had not named Singh as accused in the charge-sheet filed under Section 173 of CrPC.

It was only after going through the case records that the trial court felt that there was prima facie evidence against Singh in coal scam case, as was the case with Rao in Pathak cheating case, warranting their summoning as accused.

Section 319(1) of CrPC provides: "Where, in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence, it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence for which such person could be tried together with the accused, the Court may proceed against such person for the offence which he appears to have committed."

This is a power vested with the trial court to examine the charge-sheet and the evidence submitted by the investigating agency and scrutinize whether the probe agency had evidence to name a person as accused but had inadvertently or deliberately left him out. This discretionary power with the trial judge was meant to ensure that no person suspected of committing a crime escaped the scrutiny of law.

This concept was explained well by the Supreme Court in Raghubans Dubey vs State of Bihar [AIR 1967 SC 1167]. It had said: "In our opinion, once cognizance has been taken by the Magistrate, he takes cognizance of an offence and not the offenders; once he takes cognizance of an offence it is his duty to find out who the offenders really are and once he comes to the conclusion that apart from the persons sent up by the police some other persons are involved, it is his duty to proceed against those persons. The summoning of the additional accused is part of the proceeding initiated by his taking cognizance of an offence."