IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT PATNA CRIMINAL MISCELLANEOUS No.73 of 2026 Arising Out of PS. Case No.-6 Year-2020 Thana- JAGDISHPUR District- Bhojpur ======================================================

1. Indradev Yadav Son of Late Daroga Yadav Resident of-Gram- Roop Bandh, P.S.-Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur.

2. Akhilesh Yadav Son of-Rajendra Yadav Resident of-Gram- Roop Bandh, P.S.-Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur.

3. Pappu Yadav Son of-Indradev Yadav Resident of-Gram- Roop Bandh, P.S.-

Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur.

4. Jyotish Yadav Son - Indradev Yadav Resident of-Gram- Roop Bandh, P.S.-

Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur.

5. Nandkishore Kumar S/O Rajendra Yadav Resident of-Gram- Roop Bandh, P.S.-Jagdishpur, District- Bhojpur.

... ... Petitioner/s Versus

1. The State of Bihar

2. Gupteshwar Kumar Son of-Lorik Yadav Resident of- Gram- Roop Bandh, P.S-Jagdishpur, District - Bhojpur.

... ... Opposite Party/s ======================================================

Appearance :

For the Petitioner/s : Ms. Akanksha Malviya, Advocate Mr. Akash Keshav, Advocate Mr. Ayushman Kishore, Advocate Mr. Anuj Kumar Srivastava, Advocate Ms. Naina Nancy, Advocate For the State : Mr. Chandra Bhushan Prasad, APP ======================================================

CORAM: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE SOURENDRA PANDEY

ORAL JUDGMENT

Date : 13-01-2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioners and learned APP for the State.

2. The present application has been filed by the petitioner seeking following relief(s):-

“That this Criminal Miscellaneous application is being filed praying for quashing and setting aside of the Order dated 30.06.2025 passed in Sessions Trial Case No. 139 of 2021 titled State Vs. Vinod Kumar Yadav and Others (arising out of Jagdishpur P.S. Case No. 06 of 2020) by the Learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVII, Bhojpur at Ara whereby and whereunder the Learned Additional Sessions Judge-XVII, Bhojpur has been pleased to reject the application dated 05.07.2024 filed by the Petitioners herein, accused persons therein under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Hereinafter referred to as 'CrPC') mirrored as Section 348 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (Hereinafter referred to as 'BNSS') to recall the Prosecution Witness No. 1 (Gupteshwar Kumar) and Prosecution Witness No. 4 (Tez Narayan Yadav) for further cross-

examination.”

3. Learned counsel for the petitioners submit that the petitioners of the present application are the accused persons in the ongoing Sessions Trial No. 139 of 2024. It has been submitted that upon registration of the FIR, being Jagdishpur P.S.

Case No. 06 of 2024, for offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307 and 302 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act, the police took up investigation and subsequently submitted charge-sheet. Thereafter, the Court of learned ACJM- VI took cognizance against the petitioners for the aforesaid offences on 11.09.2020. The charges were subsequently framed on 23.03.2022 for the offences under Sections 147, 148, 149, 302 and 307 of the Indian Penal Code and under Section 27 of the Arms Act.

4. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that prior to filing of the present application, six prosecution witnesses were examined. The first prosecution witness, namely Gupteshwar Kumar, was examined and cross-examined on 19.12.2022, while prosecution witness no. 6, the doctor, namely, Dr. Tez Narayan Raj was examined on 11.03.2024. He further submits that upon review of the prosecution evidence, the learned counsel appearing on behalf of the accused persons realized that certain crucial aspects pertaining to the testimony of prosecution witness no. 1 and prosecution witness no. 4 remained inadequately addressed and which go to the very root of the prosecution case.

5. It has been submitted that the omissions were vital for testing the testimony, credibility of the prosecution witnesses and for the ends of justice and fair play, it is essential to recall the witnesse