IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Criminal Writ No.1202 of 2010 ============================================= Davesh Chandra Saxena .... .... Petitioner/s Versus State Of Bihar & Anr .... .... Respondent/s ==================== 5/ 19thAugust 2011 Petitioner-accused has come up with a grievance that without giving him sufficient opportunity, the defence case has been closed vide order dated 28.10.2010 in connection with Special Case No. 30/88 although on the said date petitioner had filed petition under Section 294 of the Cr.P.C. for getting the documents incorporated under paragraph-3 and 4 thereof be admitted in evidence on an admission of prosecution, which happens to be the requirement of Section 294 of the Cr.P.C. The order impugned also contains reference of the above referred petition but surprising enough the learned lower court could not dealt with its propriety while permitting the defence to have other exhibits followed with closure of the case. The State is unrepresented and so the submission of State could not be taken. 2 Taking into account the pendency of instant trial since 1988 as well as the earlier direction given by this Court vide order dated 10.03.2011 in Cr. Misc. No.8275 of 2011, it appears that the same happens to be a luxury trial. Be that as it may, after all the accused should be given an opportunity to adduce evidence in a way to show his innocence. The aforesaid right is subject to curtailment if the accused misuses the privilege. Therefore, an opportunity is given to the accused to get his defence produced on the next date positively and for that purpose the Court will not grant any further adjournment. If so desires, the accused will at liberty to take all necessary measures in between the date. With the aforesaid observation, the instant criminal writ is disposed of. perwez (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)