IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14908 of 2008 BABULAL MAHTO, Son of Late Sukar Mahto, resident of Village- Supaul, P.S. Akabarpur, District- Nawada....................................Informant/Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Ashok Yadav, Son of Late Faudu Yadav. 3. Ravindra Yadav, Son of Late Faudu Yadav. 4. Sanjay Kumar @ Tink, Son of Umesh Prasad. O.P. Nos. 2 to 4 all residents of Village –Supaul, P.S. Akabarpur, District-Nawada....................................................Opposite Parties. THE STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 2 14.05.2010. Heard learned counsel for O. P. Nos. 2 to 4 and counsel for the State. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.02.2008 passed by the learned F. T. C. No. III, Nawadah, in Sessions Trial No. 102 of 2006/28 of 2006 arising out of Akabarpur P.S. Case No. 18 of 2002 whereby and whereunder the learned trial court has rejected the petitioner’s application dated 19.09.2007 filed for summoning the O.P. Nos. 2 to 4 under Section 319 of Cr.P.C. From the impugned order, it appears that the case was instituted on 08.03.2002 and the charge sheet was submitted on 11.05.2006 against other accused but O.P. Nos.2 to 4 were not sent up for trial. In the trial all the witnesses have been examined except the I.O. In the impugned order the learned trial 2 court has specifically mentioned that there is no evidence against the O.P. Nos. 2 to 4 and hence on this ground the petitioner’s application under Section 319 of Cr. P. C. has been rejected. Considering the submissions of O.P. Nos. 2 to 4 and the findings recorded in the order impugned particularly filing of petition under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. at the fag end of trial, I am not inclined to interfere in the matter. The application is dismissed. U.K. (Dinesh Kumar Singh,J)