JAI SINGH Vs. STATE OF HARYANA AND ANOTHER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioner has filed this petition challenging the order dated 19.02.2015, whereby, application moved by the prosecution to summon respondent No.2 to face the trial as an additional accused under Section 319 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 ('Cr. P.C.' for short), was dismissed.

(2.) Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that from the statements of PW9 Sube Singh injured, eye witnesses PW3 Satyawan and PW5 Jai Singh, it was evident that respondent No.2 was present at the spot armed with sickle and had given a blow with it on the right eye of the injured Sube Singh.

(3.) Learned counsel for respondent No.2, on the other hand has submitted that respondent No.2 was found innocent during investigation. Respondent No.2 has been falsely involved in this case being mother of the co-accused. Section 319 of Cr. P.C. reads as under:-