IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.7686 OF 2008 1. SHEOJI RAI, SON OF YAMUNA RAI 2. RAMESH RAI, SON OF RAGHUNATH RAI 3. SATYANARAYAN RAI, SON OF RAMCHANDRA RAI 4. LALBABU RAI, SON OF RAMCHANDRA RAI 5. RAGHUNATH RAI, SON OF RAMCHANDRA RAI ALL RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHALISPUR, POLICE STATION MARHOWRA, DISTRICT SARAN AT CHAPRA ……………………………………………………………………………PETITIONERS VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. DILIP KUMAR YADAV, SON OF VISHWANATH PRASAD YADAV, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE KHALISPUR, POLICE STATION MARHOWRAH, DISTRICT SARAN AT CHAPRA ………………………………………………………………..OPPOSITE PARTIES ********** 2 18/01/2010 This application has been filed against the order dated 25.06.2007 by which the application filed on behalf of the petitioners to recall PW 9, the Investigating Officer, for further cross-examination has been rejected. The petitioners have filed an application for recalling PWs 4 and 5 for re-cross-examination. The Court below and the High Court have rejected the prayer. Again on 06.04.2004, the petitioners have filed an application seeking permission to re-cross-examine PW 9. I do not find that the petitioners have made out even a single good reasoning as to why they should be permitted to recall PW 9. It is well settled that witnesses cannot be recalled for filling up in the lacunae of either the 2 prosecution or the defence version. I am constrained to observe that the application was filed on 06.04.2004 before the Court below which appears to have been disposed of on 25.06.2007. It appears that either the petitioners had not pressed this application or that the Court below had delayed in passing the impugned order. Both aspects are not appreciated by this Court. I do not find any illegality in the order dated 25.06.2007. This application is accordingly dismissed. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)