Krishna Kumar - (1.) -Heard learned counsel for the revisionist.
(2.) THIS revision has been filed against the order dated 29.11.2000 passed by the IInd Additional District and Sessions Judge, Bulandshahr, whereby the learned lower court summoned the accused under Section 319, Cr. P.C. Learned counsel for the revisionist contended that in the order itself, it is mentioned that the said accused Pradeep was nominated in the F.I.R. and charge-sheet was not submitted by the Investigating Officer. The reliance has been placed by the learned counsel for the revisionist upon 2000 (40) ACC 795 to argue that when a person was already accused in the F.I.R. and the charge-sheet was not submitted against him, the provision of Section 319, Cr. P.C. cannot be invoked. The said decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court is very clear on this point when it is mentioned that the basic requirements for invoking the above Section 319, Cr. P.C. is that it should appear to the Court from the evidence collected during trial or in the inquiry that some other person, who is not arraigned as an accused in that case, has committed an offence for which that person could be tried together with the accused already arraigned. In this case, the revisionist was arraigned as accused and therefore, the learned lower court committed illegality in summoning the revisionist. The order dated 29.11.2000 is, therefore, set aside.
(3.) THE revision is accordingly allowed.;