Section 319 CrPC summoning orders need merits review; later proceedings cannot shield an order from challenge.

Section 319 CrPC confers an extraordinary, discretionary power that must be exercised sparingly on strong and cogent evidence. The High Court erred by refusing to test the summoning order on merits merely because later proceedings under Section 446 CrPC had been initiated; subsequent proceedings could not validate an order that was itself open to challenge or prevent scrutiny of its correctness. The appellant's claim of juvenile status also required consideration. The refusal to examine the summoning order and the dismissal of the revision were therefore unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the High Court was justified in refusing to examine the correctness of the order summoning the appellants under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 on the ground of later proceedings under Section 446 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, and whether the revision required fresh consideration.

Analysis: The power under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 is an extraordinary and discretionary power to be exercised sparingly on strong and cogent evidence. The High Court did not test the legality of the summoning order on merits and instead declined interference only because later proceedings had been initiated after the summoning order. Subsequent proceedings could not cure or protect an order that was itself liable to challenge, and they could not preclude examination of the correctness of the original summoning order. The plea regarding the appellant's juvenile status also required consideration.

Conclusion: The refusal to examine the summoning order on account of subsequent proceedings was incorrect, and the High Court's dismissal of the revision was unsustainable.

---