IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40567 of 2008 Satyendra Narain Singh, son of Sri Alakhdeo Narain Singh, Ratanpur, PS Haspura, Dist. Aurangabad – Petitioner. Vs. 1) The State of Bihar, 2) Banshropan Singh, son of Late Rakshya Singh, 3) Kedar Singh, son of Gobardhan Singh, 4) Shashi Shekhar Sharma @ Shashi Bhushan Sharma @ Tappu, son of Jhalakdeo Singh, village Ratanpur, PS Haspura, Dist. Aurangabad – Opp. Parties. 2 28.7.2011 HeardMr. Ashok Kumar Singh, counsel for the petitioner and the A.P.P. representing the State. This application has been filed for quashing the order, dated 19.8.2008 passed in G.R. No. 436/2000, Tr. No. 1198/2008 by the Judicial Magistrate, 1st Class, Daunagar. The petitioner has filed an application under section 319 Cr.P.C. for the purpose of summoning opposite party no.2 to face the trial. This matter had come to this court when it was directed that the petitioner should lead his evidence within one month. It may be stated that the petitioner failed to provide any witness even after being granted an opportunity by the court. The only evidence which has been led in this case is by the petitioner who is the informant of this case. No other person has come forward to support the case of the petitioner. The application was filed to summon opposite party no.4. The court called for a report which indicated that opposite party no.4 had an alias name, but it has also come on record that he was working in the Indian Army and was on duty on the date when the alleged occurrence took place. There is sufficient 2 material with respect to this aspect of the matter. The satisfaction of the court is the prime factor which is important for consideration as to whether a person is prima facie guilty of an offence for the purpose of summoning him to face the trial under section 319 of the Cr. P.C. The reasons given by the court, in the opinion of this court are not defective and in fact merely filing an application under section 319 Cr.P.C. does not necessarily mean that the person should be summoned, specially if the evidence led is of a weak nature and the court comes to a conclusion that there is virtually no chance of conviction in the case. In view of the aforesaid facts I find no merit in this application. This application is dismissed. haque ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)