JUDGMENT Mrs. Sabina, J.: - Vide this order, above mentioned two petitions would be disposed of as these have arisen out of the order dated 15.1.2011 passed by the trial Court, whereby petitioners were ordered to be summoned on an application moved by the prosecution under Section 319 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) to face the trial as additional accused. 2. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that the petitioners were found innocent during investigation. Vide the impugned order dated 15.1.2011, petitioners as well as Surinder Singh and Amrit Singh were summoned to face the trial as additional accused. Challan had been presented against accused Harvinder @ Gora and Harsimrat Singh. So far as accused Amrit Singh was concerned, he was declared a juvenile. In the meantime, trial has concluded and all the accused, who have faced trial have since been acquitted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 31.10.2011. 3. Learned State counsel as well as counsel for the complainant, on the other hand, have opposed the petitions. 4. Section 319 Cr.P.C. reads as under:- “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 together 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 the 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.” 4. 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.” 4. Thus, as per the above provision, Court has ample power to summon any person as an additional accused if it appears during trial that such person appears to have committed the offence. 5. In the present case, after investigation of the case challan was presented against Harvinder Singh @ Gora and Harsimarat Singh. During the pendency of the trial, prosecution moved an application to summon the petitioners as additional accused under Section 319 Cr.P.C. Vide the impugned order dated 15.1.2011, the said application was allowed and petitioners were ordered to be summoned to face the trial as additional accused. However, in the meantime the accused, who had faced trial have since been acquitted by the trial Court vide judgment dated 31.10.2011. A perusal of the said judgment reveals that complainant Lakhbir Singh, in his cross-examination, stated that his signatures had been obtained on blank papers and the names of the accused had been disclosed by the persons gathered at the spot. The said witness was declared hostile. PW-3 Arvinder Singh also stated that they had suffered injuries as some motorcyclists and gypsy driver had hit their motorcycle. PW-2 Jagdeep Singh, eye witness had also stated that Lakhbir Singh and Arvinder Singh had been restrained by some unknown persons and they had been caused injuries by them. Thus, in the present case, the accused, who have faced the trial, have since been acquitted. Injured as well as the eye witnesses had been failed to support the prosecution case. In this background, these petitions are liable to be allowed. 6. Accordingly, both the petitions are allowed. Impugned order dated 15.1.2011, whereby petitioners were ordered to be summoned to face the trial as additional accused, is set aside. --------0.B.S.0------------ —————————