IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA Cr.Misc. No.40776 of 2008 RAM EKBAL RAI, SON OF LATE MANKESHWAR RAI, RESIDENT OF VILLAGE- KHALWA, POLICE STATION- NAUTAN, DISTRICT- SIWAN ----- PETITIONER Versus THE STATE OF BIHAR ----- OPPOSITE PARTY ----------- 2 10.8.2009 The purpose of Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is to ensure that justice is done between the parties. It is for the Court hearing the matter to consider whether it is important to recall a witness for re-examination and to conclude whether it is useful for the purpose of coming to correct conclusion with respect to the allegation contained in the First Information Report. In this case the entire matter remained pending because of the absence of the Investigating Officer. At paragraph 6 of the application it has been stated that the Court waited for the Investigating Officer and granted about 35 dates so that the Investigating Officer could be examined. Finally, the Investigating Officer turned up on 1.7.2008. On that day Mr. Bangali Singh practicing lawyer in the district of Siwan, who was appearing during the trial, did not come to the Court and prayer was made on behalf of the petitioner to postpone the 2 case for a day. When the Court refused to postpone the case then a lawyer was picked from the association for the purposes of cross examination. Obviously a counsel picked at the last moment would hardly be capable of cross examining a witness if he was not connected with the trial of the case leading to prejudice to the party concerned. It also appears that both the prosecution and the defence had made a prayer that the Investigating Officer ought to be re-called for cross examination as the cross examination was not conducted properly. In the circumstances and facts of this case, this Court finds that sufficient grounds have been made out by the petitioner to allow his prayer under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure and further directs that an opportunity may be granted to the petitioner to recall the Investigating Officer for cross examination. All efforts should be made by the Court to ensure his attendance and if the Investigating Officer disobeys the summons of the Court, the trial Court would be at liberty to take appropriate steps against him by reporting it to the higher officials, as it 3 appears that the Investigating Officer has been avoiding the Court for some reason or the other. The order dated 21.8.2008 passed by Fast Track Court No. III, Gopalganj is quashed and the Trial Court is directed to issue summons to the Investigating Officer in Sessions Trial No. 47/2001 for appearing in Court for the purpose of cross examination. A copy of this order may be communicated to the Court of the Fast Track Court No. III, Gopalganj in Sessions Trial No. 47/2001 at the cost of the petitioner. Sanjay (Sheema Ali Khan, J.)