1. Heard learned Counsel for the applicants and the learned P. P for the respondent No.1-State.

2. By this application, the applicants have impugned the order dated 2nd August, 2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Vasai, by which, an application (Exhibit 53) preferred by the prosecution under Section 319 Cr. P. C. came to be allowed and the applicants came to be arraigned as accused in Sessions Case No. 31 of 2007.

3. Mr. Marwadi, learned Counsel for the applicants has impugned the aforesaid order essentially on three counts-

(1) - that the basic requirement of Section 319 Cr. P. C. is that if 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. He submitted that the case had abated against some of the accused who were charge-sheeted and one accused was acquitted and hence, the basic and essential requirement of Section 319, that there has to be other accused with whom the applicants could be tried with, is not fulfi