IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.15242 of 2008 MURLI SAH @ CHENOGO SAH Versus STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 2 03.02.2011 Learned counsel for the State, Miss. Renuka Ratnakar, A.P.P. is present. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 12.10.2007 passed by learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Purnea in Dhamdaha (Mirganj) P.S. Case No. 189 of 1993, whereby the petitioner has been summoned under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. The impugned order does not reflect the materials which persuaded the learned Court below to summon the petitioner under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. Initially the case was registered under Section Sections 25(1)a and 26(B) of the Arms Act in which the petitioner was made accused. Subsequently, the petitioner was not sent up for trail however non- F.I.R accused Narain Sah was charge sheeted, which was accepted by learned Court below vide order dated 12.10.2007. Subsequently a petition was field under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. for summonsing the petitioner. By the impugned order dated 12.10.2007 2 learned Court below while summoning the petitioner recorded that there are materials on record. Now it is well settled principle that the powers under Section 319 of the Cr.P.C. should not be casually exercised. From the impugned order it does not reflect the specific material which persuaded the learned Court below to exercise the power under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Hence the order dated 12.10.2007 passed in Dhamdaha (Mirganj) P.S. Case No. 189 of 1993 passed by the learned Judicial Magistrate, Ist Class, Purnea, is hereby quashed. However it is expected that learned Court below will exercise the power afresh if sufficient materials are available on record. Bhardwaj ( Dinesh Kumar Singh, J.)