IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.46095 of 2007 1. RAM LAKHAN DAS, SON OF LATE BAL KISHUN DAS. 2. DRIGRAJ DAS. 3. BHRIGRAJ DAS. 4. DILKESHWAR DAS. 5. DINA NATH DAS. 6. HIRA LAL DAS. ALL SONS OF RAM BILASH DAS. 7. SUBHAS DAS, SON OF LATE LAKHI DAS. ALL RESIDENTS OF VILLAGE-BATHANI TOLA, AZAD BIGHA, POLICE STATION-KOCH, DISTRICT-GAYA. …………………………………………………………PETITIONERS. Versus 1. THE STATE OF BIHAR. 2. GANAURI PASWAN, SON OF RAM CHANDRA PASWAN, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE-BATHANI, TOLA, AZAD BIGHA, P.S. KOCH, DISTRICT-GAYA. …………………………………………………OPPOSITE PARTIES. ----------- For the Petitioners : Mr. Mukul Prasad, Advocate. For the State : Mr. Jharkhandi Upadhyay, A.P.P. -------------- 4. 19.1.2009. The petitioners, all of whom, are F.I.R. named accused of Koch P.S. Case No.52 of 2003, G.R.1239 of 2002, have questioned the legality and propriety of order dated 17.8.2007 passed therein by Sri A.L. Yadav, learned Judicial Magistrate, First Class, Gaya, whereby on the basis of the petition filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. by the prosecution, the prosecution evidence has been re-opened when the case had already reached the stage of advancing argument. It appears from the impugned order that the prosecution evidence was closed on 19.4.2007 on the basis of the prosecution witnesses not being present and sufficient time had been granted to them . However, as pointed out by the prosecution, the summons and processes issued by the court to the - 2 - witnesses had not been served on them and the service report was not available in the court records. It was only on account of that reason that the learned Magistrate was persuaded to reopen the prosecution case and record evidence of the prosecution witnesses, four of whom were present on the day of passing of the impugned order. I find no apparent illegality in the impugned order so as to interfere with the same. The application is accordingly dismissed P.S. (Abhijit Sinha,J)