IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.41819 of 2010 LALITA DEVI Versus SATTE OF BIHAR ----------- 2. 14.01.2011. Heard. Even after twenty years having been allowed to the prosecution, it appears not bringing the whole of its evidence before the court below, this was the reason that the court below shut out his evidence. The petitioner who is the informant preferred a petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. which was dismissed which has prompted him to approach this court through the present petition. First part of the Section is discretion of the court. In case the discretion is applied then it becomes mandate for the court to ensure that the witnesses which it wants to examine for the just decision of the case are indeed examined. The court below having not applied its discretion under the circumstances and back drop of long pendency of the case, this court is not required to replace the lower courts satisfaction and opinion on its non- action under Section 311 Cr.P.C. Petition is dismissed. B.Kr. ( Dharnidhar Jha,J.)