IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.25314 of 2008 MD.JAMO, Son of Moinuddin, resident of Ganj Mohalla, Police Station-Aurangabad(T), District-Aurangabad................Petitioner. Versus 1. The State of Bihar. 2. Habibula, Son of Late Waliullah, resident of Kashdihra Tola, Mukhlal Bigha, P.S. Jamhore, District-Aurangabad..Opposite Parties. ----------- 3. 13.01.2011. Heard learned counsels for the petitioner, State and opposite party no.2. The petitioner is aggrieved by the order dated 17.06.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. II, Aurangabad, in Sessions Trial No. 148 of 2002 whereby the application under Section 311 Cr. P. C. for exhibiting deed of gift, by virtue of which the petitioner claims the land in dispute, has been rejected. This Court vide order dated 08.04.2010, issued Dasti summons to opposite party no.2 and also directed for faxing the order to the learned court below for an information being given to the counsel for opposite party no.2 in the learned court below. Learned counsel for the petitioner was also directed to serve the copy of the order to the learned counsel for opposite party no.2 2 appearing before the learned court below and the office note reflects that through Fax the order was transmitted to the learned court below but till date the opposite party no.2 is not in appearance. The impugned order reflects that the case is of the year 2002, charge sheet was framed on 04.07.2002 and the prosecution case was closed on 06.02.2008 whereas the defence case was closed on 12.05.2008 and the matter was fixed for argument. By virtue of this court’s order dated 08.04.2010, the further proceedings pending before the learned court below was stayed naturally opposite party no.2 must have come to know that the present proceeding is pending before this Court even then the opposite party no.2 has chosen not to appear in spite of service of notice. The petitioner filed an application under Section 311 Cr. P. C. for exhibiting the deed of gift by virtue of which the petitioner claims disputed land on which the alleged occurrence took place. Prima facie, it appears that exhibition of the gift is essential for reaching to just conclusion of the case. In the circumstances, it is expected 3 from the learned court below to give an opportunity to the petitioner for exhibiting the said deed of gift with giving adequate opportunity to the other side for rebuttal. The said exercise it is expected to be completed by the learned court below within a period of a month. It is expected that the Learned court below may modify the order dated 06.02.2008 and 12.05.2008 whereby the prosecution and defence cases have been closed, if an appropriate application to that effect is being filed on behalf of the petitioner. For the reasons stated above, the order dated 17.06.2008 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C. No. II, Aurangabad, in Sessions Trial No. 148 of 2002 is hereby quashed, with the liberty as provided above. With the aforesaid directions, this application is allowed. Let the order be transmitted to the learned court below through Fax at the cost of the petitioner. U.K. (Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.)