IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.37481 of 2007 1. MANGAL RAI 2. Om Prakash Rai Both sons of Radha Rai, R/o village Mashahan, P.S. Marhowrah, District – Saran …… Petitioners Versus STATE OF BIHAR ………. Opp. Party ----------- For the petitioner : M/s Nurul Hoda & Manoj Kumar, Advocates For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhaya, A.P.P. ------- 3 2.12.2008 The two petitioners, who though not named as accused but whose complicity in the crime came to light in course of the deposition of the prosecution witnesses in connection with Sessions Trial No. 485 of 2006 and who have been summoned under section 319 Cr.P.C. to face the trial along with the others already facing the trial, by order dated 12.7.2007 passed by the leaned 1st Additional Sessions Judge, Saran at Chapra have prayed for quashing of the same. It appears that Nayagaon P.S. Case No. 5 of 2006 registered under sections 302, 201/34 I.P.C. was registered against unknown on the basis of the fardbeyan given by Chowkidar Triloki Singh at 15.15 hrs. on 23.1.2006 persuant to the detection of a dead body of an unknown lying on the banks of the Ganga with his throat cut. It further appears that in course of the trial prosecution witnesses Makhtar Ram, Ravi Ranjan Kumar Ram, Kabita Kumari and Devendra Kumar Yadav fully supported the prosecution case and - 2 - testified to the complicity of both the petitioners in kidnapping and murder of the deceased who was later identified as Raj Kishore Ram. It was on the basis of such material evidence that the prosecution filed a petition for summoning these two petitioners under section 319 Cr.P.C. which was allowed by the impugned order. The submissions on behalf of the petitioners is that they have been living in Kolkata for the past two decades in connection with their employment and rarely come to the village and they have nothing to do with anything occurring in the village. It is further submitted that they have been falsely implicated in this case only because their father being a well wisher of the victim’s family on the kidnapping of Raj Kishore Ram had tried to negotiate for the secure and safe release of the victim. It is further submitted that the deposition of P.Ws. 1 to 4 in court is completely in contradistinction to their statement under section 161 Cr.P.C. The expression “evidence” used in section 319 Cr.P.C. means evidence on record and once in course of trial evidence comes on record against a person, other than the accused persons, who appear to have committed the offence or his complicity in the crime comes to light, he can be summoned to face the trial together with the other accused. The law is well settled on this point. The issues raised by the learned counsel for the petitioners are all matters of facts and figures which are required to be proved and can be done only in course of the trial by leading of cogent evidence. - 3 - Due regard being had to the facts and circumstances of the case I find no merit in this application which is dismissed. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)