Additional complaint after cognizance is impermissible; further accused must be proceeded against under Section 319 CrPC.

Punjab and Haryana HC held that once cognizance had already been taken on the original complaint, a fresh or additional complaint on the same allegations was impermissible during the pendency of the trial. If the complainant sought to add further accused on the basis of material emerging in evidence, the proper course was to invoke Section 319 CrPC at the appropriate stage. The second cognizance taken through the additional complaint, and the consequential summoning order founded on it, could not be sustained. The court therefore quashed the additional complaint and the summoning order in exercise of inherent jurisdiction.

---

---

Issues: Whether the additional complaint and the consequential summoning order were maintainable when cognizance had already been taken in the original complaint and the accused sought to be added could instead be proceeded against under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Analysis: The original complaint was already pending and cognizance had been taken by the competent court. The filing of a fresh or additional complaint on the same set of allegations during the pendency of the original trial was held to be impermissible, because the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 does not provide for such a course once cognizance has been taken. If further accused were to be added on the basis of material emerging in the trial, the proper course was to invoke Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 at the appropriate stage. Since cognizance of the offence had already been taken once, the second cognizance through the additional complaint and the summoning order founded on it could not be sustained.

Conclusion: The additional complaint and the summoning order were not maintainable and were quashed in exercise of inherent jurisdiction.

---