IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.24758 of 2010 SUSHIL PAL @ SUSHIL PANDIT S/O LATE RAGHU PANDIT, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SINGHIYA DIWANGANJ, P.S. SADAR MUFFASSIL, DISTRICT PURNIA ….. PETITIONER Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR 2. RAJDHAN PANDIT S/O LATE MUSHARU PANDIT, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE SUJAPUR, P.S. BARARI, DISTRICT KATIHAR ….. OPPOSITE PARTIES ----------- 2. 9.3.2011 The petitioner has sought quashing of the order dated 28.5.2010 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, F.T.C.2, Purnea in Sessions Trial No.597 of 2007, by which the Trial Court has allowed an application u/s.311 Cr.P.C. On going through the order impugned, I find that the Court thought it necessary that the informant be questioned on the point of execution of the documents, which was the subject matter of forgery for the just decision of the case and, therefore, I see no reason to disagree with such finding. However, this Court is informed that till date the informant has not turned up for evidence despite repeated summons by the Court. In view of such, the Trial Court is directed to fix an outer limit for examination of the witness and in case he fails to turn up within the time limit, the case shall not be further adjourned for his examination. It is also made clear that non-bailable Dasti - 2 - warrant shall be given simultaneously for the informant so that there is no further delay in the trial. With these observations, the application is disposed of. It is expected that the whole exercise will be over within a period of three months from the date of receipt of this order. Narendra/ ( Anjana Prakash, J. )