Summons to the accused are valid if there is pre trial evidence indicating prima facie involvement of the accused.
In the case of Banerjee (1901), the court held that a fresh complaint can be entertained when there is a manifest error or miscarriage of justice in the previous order, or when fresh evidence is presented. The court also stated that summoning an accused is a serious matter and that the Magistrate must scrutinize the allegations made in the complaint to prevent innocent people from facing frivolous complaints.
The court upheld the orders passed by the trial court issuing summons against the accused Archbishop for the alleged offenses, as all the three courts had discussed in detail the prima facie involvement of the accused in the alleged offenses. The court also rejected the petitioners’ challenges to the observations made in the impugned judgment and stated that the said observations did not nullify any concluded transactions involving the properties of Catholic Churches.
The Criminal Appeal filed by the AppellantArchbishop, and all the SLPs filed by Eparchy of Bathery and
Catholic Diocese of Thamarassery were dismissed by the Supreme Court.
CARDINAL MAR GEORGE ALENCHERRY …APPELLANT
Versus
STATE OF KERALA & ANR. …RESPONDENTS decided by the Supreme Court of India on 17.03.23