JUDGMENT
B.J. Shethna, J.
1. Heard learned Counsel for the parties.
2. Only one submission is made by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the learned Additional Sessions Judge committed an error in passing the impugned order dated 29.1.93 on the application dated 24.7.92 made under Section 319 Cr.P.C. He submitted that the petitioner’s names were already disclosed in FIR as accused but after completion of the investigation, the police did not file challan against them and filed charge-sheet only against some of the accused. Therefore, the powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. could not have been invoked by the learned Sessions Judge. It was submitted that the powers under Section 319 Cr.P.C. can be invoked against the persons who are not the accused. This submission of the learned Counsel cannot be accepted in view of the Supreme Court’s judgment in Kishan Singh and Ors. v. State of Bihar 1993 Cr.L.R. (SC) 193. The Supreme Court held that the exercise of powers by the Sessions Court under wrongful provision will not render the impugned order illegal. Thus, no jurisdictional error is committed by the Sessions Court while passing the impugned order and, therefore, this Court will not interfere with such order passed by the sessions court. Hence, this petition is dismissed. The record of this case be sent to the trial Court forthwith.