JUDGMENT 1. - The instant revision has been preferred by the petitioner challenging the order dated 25.1.2010 passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Udaipur in Sessions Case No. 9/2008 whereby the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has taken cognizance against the petitioner for the offence under Section 135 of the Rajasthan Electricity Act. 2. The short question involved in the instant revision is as to whether the Sessions Court has power to summon the petitioner as an additional accused without recording evidence. 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner while referring to the provision of Section 319 Cr.P.C. and the judgment of the Apex Court in the case of Kishun Singh and Ors. v. State of Bihar, (1993) 2 SCC 16 submits that in this case the evidence of the prosecution had been started pursuant to the framing of charges and thus the Sessions Court had no power to summon the additional accused without recording evidence. He thus submits that the order impugned is absolutely illegal and deserves to be quashed. 4. Learned Public Prosecutor is also not in a position to support the order passed by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge because the same is absolutely in violation of the mandate of the law. 5. Heard and considered the arguments advanced at the bar. Perused the order impugned and the case law. 6. The legal position is well settled that a Sessions Judge has no power to summon an additional accused except by resorting to provision of Section 319 Cr.P.C. In the instant case, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge has summoned the petitioner herein by resorting to the provisions of Section 190 Cr.P.C. and placing reliance on the evidence collected by the Investigating Agency during investigation. The position of law is well settled that the learned Addl. Sessions Judge cannot summon an additional accused without recording evidence and without reaching the stage of Section 319 Cr.P.C. Hence, this Court is of the opinion that the order impugned cannot be sustained and has to be quashed. 7. Accordingly, the revision succeeds. The order impugned dated 25.1.2010 passed by Addl. Sessions Judge No.1, Bikaner is hereby quashed. It is however made clear that after the evidence is collected during the trial, the learned Addl. Sessions Judge shall be free to proceed under Section 319 Cr.P.C. 8. The revision is allowed accordingly. The stay application stands disposed of. *******