IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. WJC No.458 of 2011 1. Chandra Bhushan Singh son of late Vimal Singh. 2. Sudha Bharadwaj (wife of deceased) wife of late vijay pratap singh. Both are resident of mohalla janakpur, police station mufasli, district gaya Versus The State Of Bihar ----------- 02. 29.07.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the State. The petitioner no. 1 is the informant and petitioner no. 2 is the wife of the deceased in connection with Muffasil P.S. Case No. 175 of 2008 (Sessions Trial No. 175 of 2009) for the alleged offence under Sections 302, 201/34 of the Indian Penal Code pending in the court below, are aggrieved by order dated 14.12.2010, whereby the learned court below directed that the trial in question shall be conducted by the Additional Public Prosecutor and the private lawyer engaged by the petitioners may assist the Additional Public Prosecutor. Mr. Sudhir Singh, learned counsel for the petitioners submits that the private lawyer engaged by the petitioners were not for conducting the prosecution but to act under the direction of Public Prosecutor/Additional Public Prosecutor. As such, the private lawyer is entitled to act under the direction of concerned Public Prosecutor/Additional Public 2 Prosecutor in terms of the provision of sub- section 2 of Section 301 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. He further submits that learned court below has disposed of the issue by observing that private lawyer engaged by the petitioners can simply assist the Additional Public Prosecutor. Petitioners got aggrieved by such observation filed the present application for quashing the above order dated 14.12.2010. Upon hearing the counsel for the parties and on perusal of the provision of sub-section 2 of Section 301 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is of the opinion that private lawyer engaged may not conduct the prosecution which can be done by PP/APP . However, such private lawyer on being instructed shall act therein under the directions of PP/APP and may with the permission of the court submit written arguments after the evidence is closed in the case. The impugned order is modified to the above extent. The writ application stands disposed of. Jagdish/ ( Shailesh Kumar Sinha, J.)