IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.8446 OF 2008 JAYANAND SINGH, SON OF LATE RAM SEVAK SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MUHI, POLICE STATION DARIGAON (O.P.), DISTRICT ROHTAS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SURESH YADAV, SON OF BAIJNATH YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE MURHI, POLICE STATION DARIGAON, DISTRICT ROHTAS ………………………………………………………………………..OPPOSITE PARTIES ********* 2 29/01/2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. This application has been filed challenging the order dated 05.12.2007 by which the petitioner Jayanand Singh has been asked to face trial under Section 302/34 of the Indian Penal Code. The prosecution has filed an application under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure on the ground that the witnesses have specifically stated before the Court that this petitioner was also involved in the alleged occurrence. Several arguments have been raised on behalf of the petitioner, one of them being that initially there was no evidence against the petitioner and, therefore, he was not charge sheeted and as such there is a deliberate attempt on the part of the witnesses to involve this petitioner in the alleged occurrence due to previous enmity. Prima facie, the Court has to examine whether 2 there is sufficient evidence under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure to issue summons in a case against the person to face trial. The Court below has come to the conclusion that the evidence of PWs 3 and 4 is sufficient for the purpose of issuing summons to the petitioner. In view of the aforesaid findings of the Court below, I find no merit in this application. This application is accordingly dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)