IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.14827 of 2007 UMAKANT BHARTI Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ORS ----------- 3 12.9.2008 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.P.P. for the State. The grievance of the petitioner is against the order dated 31.10.2006 passed by the learned Principal Judge, Family Court, Nalanda at Biharsharif, in case No. 30M of 2003, whereby he has rejected the prayer of the petitioner for re-examination of the two witnesses. The grounds submitted for reexamination of the two witnesses is that by inadvertence he had forgotten to put certain question to the witnesses. The petitioner happens to be the husband - O.P. in a proceeding under section 125 Cr.P.C. and forgetting to put question to the witnesses during the course examination cannot be a valid and reasonable ground for allowing petition under section 311 Cr.P.C. In any event section 311 Cr.P.C. has its own sanctity and it cannot be used as a tool to fill up the loopholes in the prosecution or defence case. In that view of the matter I find no merit in this application which is misconceived and is accordingly dismissed. Spd/- (Abhijit Sinha, J.)