IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.11043 of 2010 SAIF AHMAD S/O MUMTAZ AHMAD, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SINDHI KALA, P.S. ARA TOWN, DISTRICT BHOJPUR …. PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. MD. MANNAN S/O AMAMUL HAQUE 3. FASI RIJWAN @ TUNU S/O RAYASAT HUSSAIN 4. ARSHAD HUSSAIN @ DADU S/O LATE MD. BADRUDDIN 5. FIRDAUS AHMAD S/O LATE MD. SARAFAT HUSSAIN 6. SAFI RIJWAN S/O RAYASAT HUSSAIN 7. ALAMGIR @ JAMAL RIZWI S/O LATE NURUL HUDDA 8. ISHTIYAQUE AHMAD S/O LATE MD. SARAFAT HUSSAIN 9. RAYASAT HUSSAIN S/O LATE ABDUL HAFIJ, ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SINGHI KALA, P.S. ARA TOWN, DISTRICT BHOJPUR …. OPP. PARTIES ----------- 3. 13.12.2010 The petitioner has sought quashing of the order 15.12.2009 passed by the IIIrd F.T.C., Bhojpur, Ara in S.Tr.No.137 of 2001, by which recall of the witnesses has not been allowed and the court below has proceeded with adoption of the evidence already recorded. The Counsel for the petitioner seeks recall on the ground that Section 319 Cr.P.C. provides for a denovo trial once additional accused are added during trial. On the other hand, the Counsel for the accused persons has submitted that no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution and Section 319 Cr.P.C. in fact seeks to give benefit to the accused and it is not for the advantage of the prosecution. Considering that the witnesses had named the accused persons during trial elaborately, therefore, there 2 is no reason for recall of the witnesses, this application is dismissed. Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )