IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.125 of 2009 1. KAPILDEO SINGH SON OF DEOKISHUN SINGH 2. UMESH SINGH, SON OF LATE DEOKISHUN SINGH 3. KAMLESH SINGH, SON OF LATE BINO SINGH 4. DIWAKAR SINGH SON OF LATE BINO SINGH 5. RAJ KUMAR SINGH SON OF LATE BINO SINGH 6. RAMESH SINGH SON OF LATE SHIVJI SINGH 7. SHANKAR SINGH SON OF LATE RAM ADHAR SINGH 8. PANKAJ SINGH SON OF LATE SACHIDANAND SINGH 9. RANJAY SINGH SON OF LATE NARAYAN SINGH ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE SAKH MOHAN, P.S.- BIBHUTIPUR, DISTRICT- SAMASTIPUR. Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----------- 3 27.09.2010 Petitioners are aggrieved by order dated 3.1.2009 passed in Sessions Trial No. 69 of 1995 whereby the prosecution has been permitted to examine Raghubansh Singh and Satish Prasad Singh as witnesses. Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that this case is pending trial since 1994. Earlier, the prosecution evidence was closed considering the tardy attitude of the prosecution and the case was fixed for argument/judgment. At that stage, an application was filed by the prosecution which was considered and allowed by order dated 14.8.2008 whereby only two witnesses were permitted to be examined in this case. It is contended that subsequent thereto, several dates were fixed yet the prosecution did not produce the witnesses on behalf of the prosecution namely the wife and daughter of the deceased. On 2.1.2009, only the wife of the deceased was examined as a court witness. Learned counsel raises a grievance that by the order 2 impugned two witnesses namely Raghubansh Singh and Satish Prasad Singh, one of them is not even chargesheet witness, has been permitted to be examined. It is contrary to orders dated 14.8.2008 and 23.12.2008. This Court finds from the order dated 14.8.2008 that the trial court found that earlier the prosecution had not been pursuing the matter in right earnest. Considering the seriousness of allegation, learned court below allowed examination of two witnesses. The prosecution, however, delayed in examination of the aforesaid two witnesses. Order impugned further indicates that the prosecution has now given up examination of daughter of the deceased on the ground that she has since been gained over. Considering the entire materials on record and the submissions of the petitioners, this Court is convinced that the following order shall meet the ends of justice: Prosecution is granted an opportunity to examine the aforesaid two witnesses namely Raghubansh Singh and Satish Prasad Singh. Let the prosecution produce aforesaid two witnesses within three weeks from the date of receipt/communication of a copy of this order in the court below. If the prosecution is able to produce the aforesaid two witnesses within the aforesaid time, the trial court shall permit their examination/cross-examination and thereafter the prosecution case shall be closed and the matter shall be fixed for argument/judgment. Learned counsel for the petitioner assures 3 this Court that if the aforesaid two witnesses are produced within the aforesaid time granted by this Court, then the defence shall cross-examine the same without any delay. The application is accordingly disposed of with the aforesaid direction(s). pkj ( Kishore K. Mandal, J. )