IN THE HIGH COUR T OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.9585 of 2011 Bishnu Narayan Singh son of late Sagar Singh, resident of Village-Nawada Ben, P.S.-Udwant Nagar, District-Bhojpur, at present address Q. No. 1, Pesu Campus, New Secretariat, Patna-1. ........Petitioner Versus 1. The State Of Bihar. 2. Department of Vigilance through its Inspector General, Government of Bihar, Patna. .........Opposite Parties ----------- 02 16.09.2011 Heard learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned Special Public Prosecutor (Vigilance) for the State. Also perused the order dated 25.02.2011 passed by the learned lower Court in connection with Special Case No. 64 of 2009 arising out of Vigilance P.S. Case No. 89 of 2009. No reason has been assigned by the learned lower Court while rejecting the prayer of the petitioner to call for the inspection note which was prepared in presence of complainant (PW-1) Smt. Renubala Sinha and whose signature the aforesaid inspection report does contain (Annexure-2). During cross-examination, as submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner, the aforesaid Renubala Sinha (PW-1) has denied the existence of such document. Therefore, PW-1 has to be confronted with the document as per 2 section 155 (3) of the Evidence Act, which happens to be in the custody of Vigilance Department and which purposely been withheld by the Department in not placing before the Court. Therefore, the document appears to be of prime importance and the interest of accused. In the aforesaid event is found to be pre-judiced by the action of learned lower Court, who rejected it by non-reasoned order. As such, the order impugned is set aside with a direction to the learned lower Court to call for the concerned document. Consequent thereupon, the petition is allowed. Safik (Aditya Kumar Trivedi, J.)