IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CR. REV. No.1442 of 2007 1. BABBAN SINGH , S/O SRI CHHEDI SINGH 2. NARAD SINGH, S/O SRI NEMO SINGH BOTH RESIDENT OF VILLAGE – SHOBHNI, P.S. – SURJGARHA, DISTRICT – LAKHISARAI Versus STATE OF BIHAR & ANR ----------- For the petitioner: Mr. A.K. Thakur Mr. Ravi Ranjan For the State: Mr. Jitendra Kumar Singh I, A.P.P.I 9/ 06.05.2010 This Criminal Revision is directed against the order dated 02.11.2007 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Lakhisarai, in Sessions Trial Case No. 3 of 1999 by which he allowed the application filed by the informant permitting him to give evidence under Section 311 Cr.P.C., although earlier he was already examined, cross- examined and discharged in the said case and an application of the prosecution to recall him under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was earlier rejected. Heard learned counsel for the parties. Petition was filed in the Trial Court on behalf of informant to get him examined again as he could not state the real facts of the case due to fear of accused persons who were lodged in the same jail. That was refused on 17.8.2007. Thereafter, another petition to the same effect, filed on behalf of the informant itself on 28.9.2007. That is allowed. The legality correctness and the propriety of the same is questioned through filing this revision petition. Submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that once a petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. with to the same effect is refused that cannot be allowed later as criminal court has no power to review its own order. After going through the impugned order it appears that mistake in observation has been made ground for allowing the second application which can not be done. Accordingly, revision petition is allowed and impugned order dated 2.11.2007 is set aside. Petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is accordingly dismissed. Praful ( Mandhata Singh, J. )