Crl. Rev. No. 2798 of 2010(O&M) [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Rev. No. 2798 of 2010 (O&M) Date of Decision: October 11, 2010 Gurnam Singh …..Petitioner Vs. Jora Singh and another …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr.P.S. Hundal, Advocate for the petitioner. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) For the reasons mentioned in the application, the delay in filing of the revision petition is condoned. Application stands disposed of. Vide order dated June 7, 2010 an application filed by the prosecution for summoning Gurcharan Singh and Jora Singh has been partly allowed summoning Gurcharan Singh as an additional accused. The Crl. Rev. No. 2798 of 2010(O&M) [2] complainant is aggrieved by the said order claiming that it is a fit case where Jora Singh should have also been summoned under Section 319 Cr.P.C. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and gone through the statement of Gurnam Singh and I am of the opinion that Jora Singh is sought to be arrayed as an additional accused on the ground that he had exhorted his co-accused. A perusal of the order passed by the trial Court indicates that fair justification has been given by the trial Court by summoning Gurcharan Singh as an accused and leaving Jora Singh, taking into consideration the specific parts attributed to them. Since Jora Singh has not been attributed any injury nor he had instigated his co-accused to inflict any simple or grievous injury, no infirmity is found in the impugned order. Dismissed. October 11, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE