JUDGEMENT 1. After perusal of the record, it appears that an application for summoning the petitioner Kallu, son of Umrao, under S. 319, Cr. P.C. was moved. After the statements of P.W. 1 Nathu Ram and P.W. 2 Vinod Kumar had been recorded in the trial Court (before the learned Addl. Sessions Judge). It also appears that in the original FIR the names of Dhanu, Smt. Ram Kunwar and Ram Prasad alone find place as accused. But during the course of investigation, other witnesses, namely Kasturi and Kallu (petitioner) also were found to be co-accused in this heinous crime. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge considered the matter on 19-9-1994. He also perused the case diary containing the allegations against these two accused, namely, Smt. Kasturi and Kallu. He also found that the Investigating Officer had himself stated that investigation against Kallu was pending and he had not been arrested, although Smt. Kasturi had been arrested and a charge sheet had been sent against her. Therefore, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge found that it will be proper to ask the I.O. himself to send a supplementary charge sheet against the accused Kalloo. He, accordingly, did not deem it proper to pass any order under S. 319, Cr. P.C. 2. However, on 5-4-1995, it was found that a supplementary charge sheet against Kallo had been submitted by the Investigating Officer. That had been received in the Court. Therefore, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge, formally allowed the application under S. 319, Cr. P.C. It is against this order that this petition has been moved in this Court u/S. 482. Cr. P.C. 3. I have heard learned counsel for the parties at a stretch and gone through the record. I find that there is absolutely no force in this petition and it deserves to be dismissed. 4. In fact, the accused Kallu had been mentioned in the case diary itself as a person against whom efforts were being made to procure his presence through the warrant of arrest by the I.O. But till the submission of the charge sheet, he had not been able to lay his hand upon hi m. The learned Addl. Sessions Judge realized this difficulty. Therefore, he did not deem it proper to pass any order under S. 319, Cr. P.C. on 19-9-1994. Sessions Judge realized this difficulty. Therefore, he did not deem it proper to pass any order under S. 319, Cr. P.C. on 19-9-1994. He thought it proper to wait for the supplementary charge sheet to be submitted by the I.O. himself. 5. That purpose was achieved and the supplementary charge sheet against the accused Kallu, the petitioner, was submitted before 5-4-1995. The original application under S. 319, Cr. P.C. had been pending till then. Learned Addl. Sessions Judge should have summoned the accused Kallu on the basis of supplementary charge-sheet. A further order for summoning the accused under S. 319, Cr. P.C. was redundant. It need not have been passed as it was not warranted by law. It is, accordingly, found that the additional sentence in the order dated 5-4-1995 that the accused was being summoned under S. 319, Cr. P.C. is held to be redundant and unnecessary and it is held that the accused has been in fact summoned on the basis of a supplementary charge sheet against him. 6. With this clarification, the petition is dismissed, stay order, if any, is hereby vacated. Petition dismissed.