Crl. Rev. No. 3087 of 2009 [1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. Crl. Rev. No. 3087 of 2009 Date of Decision: July 21, 2010 Rajwinder Kaur @ Raju …..Petitioner Vs. State of Punjab and another …..Respondents CORAM: HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE M.M.S. BEDI. -.- Present:- Mr. Deep Singh, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Abhishekh Chautala, AAG Punjab. Mr. A.S. Cheema, Advocate for respondent No.2. -.- M.M.S. BEDI, J. (ORAL) Petitioner Rajwinder Kaur claims that she had been administered some poisonous medicine by her husband while her mother-in- law Nasib Kaur and father-in-law Nathu Singh had caught hold of her arms and respondent No.2 had allegedly caught-hold of her legs. Crl. Rev. No. 3087 of 2009 [2] Vide impugned order the Sessions Court had dismissed the application under Section 319 Cr.P.C. filed by the petitioner for summoning respondent No.2 as an additional accused as respondent No.2 was found innocent. I have heard counsel for the petitioner and gone through the statement of petitioner made in the Court. It appears to be a case where the entire family of respondent No.2 has been roped in on the allegation that an attempt to murder the petitioner had been made by all the family members. Respondent No.2 was unmarried sister-in-law of the petitioner. When the circumstances warrant that on account of over-zealous approach of the witnesses an attempt is being made to rope in all the family members, the exercise of discretion under Section 319 Cr.P.C. to add the additional accused on the basis of statements of such witnesses is not appropriate. No ground is made out for interference in the impugned order. Dismissed. July 21, 2010 (M.M.S.BEDI) sanjay JUDGE