IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR.MISC. NO.7748 OF 2008 RAM NANDAN PRASAD SINGH, SON OF LATE JATADHARI SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NAYAGAON, POLICE STATION NAYAGAON, DISTRICT BEGUSARAI VERSUS 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. SAHDEO SINGH, SON OF LATE JATADHARI SINGH, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE NAYAGAON, POLICE STATION NAYAGAON, DISTRICT BEGUSARAI ……………………………………………………………………….OPPOSITE PARTIES *********** 2 22/01/2010 Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and the A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State. The petitioner has challenged the order dated 14.01.2008 by which the Court below has refused the petitioner’s prayer to re-examine Sahdeo Singh and Mukesh Singh. The petitioner wants to re-examine these two witnesses on the ground that the matter has been compromised between the parties. The Court below has rejected the application on the ground that the offence made out in the First Information Report is non-compoundable. In my opinion, the Court below should permit the examination of the two persons mentioned above, only on the point of compromise. The Court below would obviously come on to its own conclusion with respect to the validity of the evidence led on the point of compromise. Obviously, the re-examination can only take place if the arguments have not begun in the case. 2 This application is disposed of with the aforesaid observation. Anand ( Sheema Ali Khan, J.)