ORDER S.K. Gangele, J. 1. Applicants by Shri Rajiv Sharma, Advocate. Respondent/State by Shri D.R. Sihare, P.P. 2. Applicants have filed this application against the order dated 6-2-2009, passed by IInd Additional Sessions Judge, Bhind in ST No. 127/2008. By the aforesaid order, the trial Court rejected the application of the applicant accused persons for summoning defence witnesses along with record. 3. Applicants along with other persons have been facing trial under sections 302, 147, 148 and 149 of Indian Penal Code. After closing the defence evidence, the applicants have recorded their statements. Thereafter applicant No. 1 Lalua @ Satyvan Singh filed a list for summoning Rojnamcha dated 16-9-2007 of Police Station Ajeetmal District Oraiya, He further stated that he would produce the rest of the witnesses on his own. Applicant Harnath Singh also filed a list of the defence witnesses whom he wanted to produce in his support, in the aforesaid list the name of five witnesses have been mentioned. 4. Learned Counsel for the applicants/accused persons prayed before the Court that the aforesaid witnesses be summoned through the Court that application has been rejected by the trial Court on the ground that the applicants have not filed any application in accordance with section 233 of Criminal Procedure Code. 5. From the facts of the case, it is clear that the applicant No. 1 wants to summon Rojnamcha of Police Station Ajeetmal, District Oraiya dated 16-9-2007. Certainly that could only be produced if there would be order from the Court. Accused Harnath Singh wants to produce five witnesses in his favour, however Learned Counsel for the applicants has submitted that only three witnesses Amit, Prakash and Jitendra are necessary to be summoned by the Court. Learned Counsel further stated that the applicant No. 2 could not produce the witnesses before the Court on his own. 6. Section 233(3) of Criminal Procedure Code gives right to an accused for summoning defence witnesses through Court which is as under: If the accused applies for the issue of any process for compelling the attendance of any witness or the production of any document or thing, the Judge shall issue such process unless he considers, for reasons to be recorded, that such application should be refused on the ground that it is made for the purpose of vexation or delay or for defeating the ends of justice. 7. 7. Even though, no such formal application has been filed by applicants before trial Court under the provisions of the aforesaid section. This section gives power to the Court to issue summon to defence witnesses. All the accused are on bail and trial is pending since 2008. Hence, there is no delay caused by summoning the defence witnesses. Apart from this, this is not a vexatious application because applicants want to summon witnesses to prove the plea of alibi which has been taken by applicant No. 2 from the beginning of the trial. 8. Looking to the aforesaid facts of the case, revision petition of the applicants is hereby allowed. Order dated 6-2-2009 is hereby set aside. The trial Court is directed to summon Rojnamcha of Police Station Ajeetmal District Oraiya and also issue summon the witnesses Amit, Prakash and Jitendra for the evidence. No order as to cost. Application allowed