While deciding the question of law and the appeal, the Supreme Court Bench of Justices Vineet Saran and Aniruddha Bose and analysed and relied on essential case laws, including Dharam Pal and others vs State of Haryana and Another. In this case, summons was issued by the magistrate against accused persons whose names were mentioned in column (2) of the chargesheet but not named in the police report or the FIR. The Court was of the opinion that the magistrate has the power to take cognizance and issue summons even if the name of the person is not mentioned in the FIR. In that judgment, it was held,
“In our view, the Magistrate has a role to play while committing the case to the Court of Session upon taking cognizance of the police report submitted before him under Section 173(2) CrPC. In the event the Magistrate disagrees with the police report, he has two choices. He may act on the basis of a protest petition that may be filed, or he may, while disagreeing with the police report, issue process and summon the accused. Thereafter, if on being satisfied that a case had been made out to proceed against the persons named in column 2 of the report, proceed to try the said persons or if he was satisfied that a case had been made out which was triable by the Court of Session, he may commit the case to the Court of Session to proceed further in the matter.”
Source: Barandbench
