IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.856 of 2005 MANIR HASAN Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- 6. 4.8.2008. This application has been filed against the order dated 19.9.2005 passed by Fast Track Court-III, Bettiah in Sessions Trial No.465 of 2000 thereby the petition filed under section 319 Cr.P.C for adding Sk. Kamil as one of the accused has been rejected. Heard the learned counsel for both the parties. The submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that the court below has examined the evidence of the prosecution witnesses meticulously beyond the scope under section 319 Cr.P.C. He has also rejected the injury report without sufficient reason. It is further submitted that there is sufficient evidence on the record to put the opposite party no.2 to face trial along with other accused persons. In this regard, it has been submitted that in course of the trial, three witnesses have been examined who have fully supported the allegation levelled against the opposite party no.2. On the other hand, the learned counsel for the opposite party no. 2 submitted that the court below has rightly rejected the prayer made under section 319 Cr.P.C. The police after investigation submitted final form against the petitioner. Cognizance was also not taken against him. However, it is admitted by him that the court below has gone beyond the scope of section 319 Cr.P.C. by examining the evidence and materials meticulously like final trial. - 2 - N.H./ Considered the submission of the learned counsel for both the parties. Perused the impugned order. I am also of the view that the court below has exceeded his jurisdiction by meticulously examining prosecution witnesses. At this stage the Court has only to see as to whether there is prima facie evidence or not against the person who is sought to be arrayed as one of the accused. Having regard to the facts and circumstances, the impugned order is hereby set aside and the case is remanded back to the court below to pass fresh order in the light of above observation as well as in the light of the scope of section 319 Cr.P.C. The order must be passed within one month of receipt of this order after hearing both the parties. ( Ghanshyam Prasad )