IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT : THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE M.N.KRISHNAN FRIDAY, THE 27TH FEBRUARY 2009 / 8TH PHALGUNA 1930 Crl.MC.No. 453 of 2009() ------------------------------ CRRP.32/2008 of SESSIONS COURT, KOTTAYAM CC.979/2005 of JUDL. MAGISTRATE OF FIRST CLASS-I, KOTTAYAM (CRMP 1548/ 2008) .................... PETITIONERS/ADDITIONAL ACCUSED 6 TO 8 : --------------------------------------------------------- 1. THANKAMMA, ICHIKALAYIL HOUSE, MALAM P.O., MANARCADU VILLAGE 2. KUNJUNNI, ICHIKALAYIL HOUSE, MALAM P.O., MANARCADU VILLAGE. 3. SUKUMARAN, PARAYIL HOUSE, MALAM P.O, MANARCADU. BY ADV. MR.M.J.THOMAS RESPONDENT/COUNTER PETITIONER : ----------------------------------------------- STATE OF KERALA, REPRESENTED BY THE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR, HIGH COURT OF KERALA, ERNAKULAM. PUBLIC PROSECUTOR MR.P.A.SALIM THIS CRIMINAL MISC. CASE HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 27/02/2009, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY PASSED THE FOLLOWING: M.N.KRISHNAN, J. -------------------------------- Crl.M.C. No.453 OF 2009 -------------------------------- Dated this the 27th day of February, 2009 O R D E R This petition is filed with a prayer to set aside the order passed by the JFCM-I, Kottayam which was confirmed by the Sessions Judge, Kottayam as per his order dated 04.11.2008. A perusal would reveal that the present petitioners were allowed to be arrayed as accused Nos. 6 to 8 as per order in Crl.M.P.No.1548/08. The learned Sessions Judge had considered the matter in detail. He had specifically referred to the omission in the charge sheet with reference to the present petitioners. Before the court, PW2 had given evidence to prove that they had also participated in the alleged commission of the crime. The Sessions Court observed the materials available to proceed against them and Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure gives ample power to include them and proceed with the trial. So there are prima facie materials available and one cannot analyse the evidence of one witness alone for the purpose of arriving at a decision. But the scope behind Section 319 is to the effect that when the court is Crl.M.C.No.453 of 2009 2 satisfied about the involvement of the particular person or persons on the materials available the court is competent to include them also and proceed with the matter. The power vested under Section 319 has been properly analysed by the Magistrate and confirmed by the Sessions Judge. I do not find any merit at this stage to interfere with the said decision. Therefore, the Crl.M.C. is dismissed. M.N.KRISHNAN JUDGE pac