Patna High Court
Law kumar @ Lav kumar @ Law Kumar YadavversusThe State of Bihar
- Decided
- Disposal
- DISMISSED
- Bench
- PRAVEEN KUMAR
Holding
Section 311 Cr.P.C. may be invoked only to meet the ends of justice and cannot be used to fill a procedural lacuna at this stage; therefore the petition is dismissed.
Summary
The petitioners, three individuals from East Champaran, filed a petition under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code seeking the opportunity to cross‑examine a witness (PW‑1) whose testimony they claimed was unsupported by other evidence. The petition challenged the order of the Additional Sessions Judge dated 24‑03‑2025 which had dismissed their Section 311 petition. The State opposed the prayer, arguing that the petition was an attempt to fill a procedural gap at an inappropriate stage. The High Court examined the submissions and held that Section 311 Cr.P.C. is to be invoked only to meet the ends of justice, not to remedy a procedural lacuna after the trial stage. Consequently, the Court found no ground for interference and dismissed the petition. The order was pronounced by Justice Praveen Kumar on 20‑04‑2026.
Issues considered
- Whether a petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. can be entertained to allow cross‑examination of a witness after the trial court has dismissed the petition.
Legislation cited
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 — s. 311
Subjects
- Section 311
- Criminal Procedure Code
- cross‑examination
- petition under CrPC
- ends of justice
- procedural lapse
Judgment
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA
CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.83129 of 2025
Arising Out of PS. Case No.-609 Year-2023 Thana- GHORASAHAN District- East
Champaran
======================================================
1. Law kumar @ Lav kumar @ Law Kumar Yadav S/o Panilal Prasad Yadav
resident of village- Khas Tola Gurmiya, P.S- Ghorasahan, District- East
Champaran.
2. Sahil Kumar @ Sahil Yadav S/o Late Ram Pukar Rai R/O Vill.- Nanaura @
Nanora, P.S- Ghorasahan, District- East Champaran.
3. Subodh Kumar S/o Dinesh Prasad @ Dinesh Mahto Resident of village-
Mathwa Tola Gurmiya, P.S-Ghorasahan, District- East Champaran.
... ... Petitioner/s
Versus
1. The State of Bihar
2. Sambha devi Videshi mahato Village mahdeva ps ghorasahan district east
champaran
2. Sambha Devi W/o Videshi Mahato Resident of village - Mahdeva, P.S-
Ghorasahan, District-East Champaran.
... ... Opposite Party/s
======================================================
Appearance :
For the Petitioner/s : Mr. Sunil Kumar No.Iii, Advocate
For the Opposite Party/s : Mr. Navin Kumar Pandey, APP
======================================================
CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE PRAVEEN KUMAR
ORAL ORDER
2 20-04-2026 Learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel
for the State.
2. The petitioner has challenged the order dated
24.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge 20,
Motihari, East Champaran in S.Tr. No. 214/2024 arising out of
Ghorasahan P.S. Case No. 609 of 2023 whereby the petition
filed by the petitioner under the provision of Section 311 Cr.P.C.
has been dismissed.
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83129 of 2025(2) dt.20-04-2026
2/3
3. As per Annexure-P/2 at Page-20, the petitioner has
filed the petition under Section 311 Cr.P.C. which is
incorporated hereinbelow:-
“;g fd mijksDr okn esas lHkh Non-official lkf{k;ksa dk lk{; gks
pqdk gSA ftlesa ihMCyq&1 lqeu dqekjh mQZ lksuh dqekjh dks NksMdj lHkh
lkf{k;ksa us ?kVuk dk leFkZu ugha fd;k gSA blfy, ihMCyq&1 lqeu dqekjh mQZ
lksuh dqekjh dk dqN fcUnqvksa ij izfrijh{k.k djuk U;k; fgr esa gSA
vr% Jheku~ ls izkFkZuk gS fd mijksDr okn ds
lk{kh ih0MCyq0&1 lqeu dqekjh mQZ lksuh
dqekjh dk izfrijh{k.k ds ikjk ua0&11 ,oa ikjk
ua0&16 ds dqN fcUnqvksa ij u/s 311 Cr.P.C.
ds rgr iqN rkN djus dk vkns”k nsus dh d`ik
iznku dh tk;A”
4. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted
that besides one Suman Kumari @ Soni Kumari, none of the
witness have supported the occurrence. Therefore, in the interest
of justice, the cross-examination of the said witness who has
been examined as P.W.1 has to be held and hence it has been
prayed that one opportunity be given to cross-examine the
witness.
5. Learned counsel for the State has vehemently
opposed the such prayer of the petitioner.
6. Heard the parties and perused the records, it is well
Patna High Court CR. MISC. No.83129 of 2025(2) dt.20-04-2026
3/3
settled that the provision of Section 311 Cr.P.C. has to be
invoked only to meet the ends of justice. The prayer of the
petitioner is nothing but filling up of the lacuna which cannot be
done at this stage.
7. In the facts and circumstances of the case, no case
for interference is made out and is accordingly dismissed.
(Praveen Kumar, J)
shivam/-
U T
Checking your session…
Lawyer court records for this case
Associated through the court’s case reference.