JUDGMENT The only ground for assailing the order dated 4th November, 2003 is that the learned court below has got no power to issue summons against the petitioner as against him neither cognizance of the offence was taken nor his name appeared in the chargesheet. 2. By the impugned order, learned Chief Judicial Magistrate has issued summons to the petitioner to appear before the court below to take trial for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 323, 324, 342, 307 and 379 of the Indian Penal Code. On going through the impugned order, it is clear that the learned court below has taken into consideration the materials collected in the case diary in which sufficient materials were found against the petitioner, constituting the alleged offences (Para-24 of the case diary). Even the Investigating Officer had clearly mentioned that there were material in the body of the case diary for submission of the charge sheet against the petitioner for the said offences, but in the prescribed column of the final form petitioner’s name was missing. Learned court below in course of the trial of the other accused found the said fact and on the basis thereof issued the summons to the petitioner by the impugned order. 3. The grievance of the petitioner is that he cannot be summoned in the case, as charge sheet has not been submitted against him and cognizance of the aforesaid offences was not taken against him. 4. Learned A.P.P. opposed the petition. It has been submitted that Section 319 of the Criminal Procedure Code gives power to the Court to summon any person to take trial, if any sufficient material is found against him, constituting a penal offence either in course of enquiry or trial. 5. I have heard learned counsel for the parties, considered their submissions and noticed the relevant facts, circumstances and the provisions of law. 6. Section 319 Cr.P.C. provides for calling any person by issuing summons to take trial along with other accused persons in course of enquiry or trial, if materials constituting penal offence are found. 7. Section 319 Cr.P.C. is reproduced herein below: “319. 6. Section 319 Cr.P.C. provides for calling any person by issuing summons to take trial along with other accused persons in course of enquiry or trial, if materials constituting penal offence are found. 7. Section 319 Cr.P.C. is reproduced herein below: “319. Power to proceed against other persons appearing to be guilty of offence.- (1) Where,in the course of any inquiry into, or trial of, an offence, it appears from the evidence that any person not being the accused has committed any offence for which such person could be tried with the accused, the Court may proceed against such person for the offence which he appears to have committed. (2) Where such person is not attending the Court, he may be arrested or summoned, as the circumstances of the case may require, for the purpose aforesaid. (3) Any person attending the Court, although not under arrest or upon a summons, may be detained by such Court for the purpose of inquiry into, or trial of, the offence which he appears to have committed. (4) Where the Court proceeds against any person under sub-section (1) then- (a)the proceedings in respect of such person shall be commenced afresh, and witnesses re-heard; (b)subject to the provisions of clause (a), the case may proceed as if such person had been an accused person when the Court took cognizance of the offence upon which the inquiry or trial was commenced.” 8. On plain reading of the aforesaid provision of law, it is clear that the Court has got statutory power to issue summons against any person not being the accused i.e. whose name is not included in the charge sheet or a person against whom cognizance has not been taken of any offence earlier if in the course of an enquiry into or trial of an offence it appears to the court that he has committed an offence for which he can be tried with the accused persons. 9. Learned court below has found sufficient material against the petitioner in the case diary, particularly in Para-24 of the case diary. He also noticed that Investigating Officer had also found sufficient material against the petitioner, but in the prescribed column the petitioner’s name was not included as an accused. Learned court below has issued summons to the petitioner on the basis of the said evidences/material on record. He also noticed that Investigating Officer had also found sufficient material against the petitioner, but in the prescribed column the petitioner’s name was not included as an accused. Learned court below has issued summons to the petitioner on the basis of the said evidences/material on record. In view of the aforesaid provision of the Cr.P.C., the ground taken by the petitioner for challenging the same has no substance. 10. I, therefore, find no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order, warranting intervention of this Court in exercise of power under Section 482 Cr.P.C. This petition is, accordingly, dismissed.