Justice Singh stated the facility to summon further suspects is discretionary and extraordinary.
“It’s to be exercised sparingly and solely in these instances the place the circumstances of the case so warrant. It’s not to be exercised as a result of the Courtroom is of the opinion that another particular person may be responsible of committing that offence. Solely the place sturdy and cogent proof happens in opposition to an individual from the proof led earlier than the Courtroom that such energy ought to be exercised and never in an informal and cavalier method,” the Courtroom defined.
The Courtroom, due to this fact, discovered that the trial decide had appropriately dismissed the appliance moved by the complainant after concluding that no prima facie case was made out in opposition to the relations to summon them as further accused.
”The order underneath problem is logical, authorized and doesn’t name for interference,” the Bench stated whereas dismissing the revision plea.
