( 2025:JHHC:28903 ) IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI Cr. Revision No. 265 of 2024 Aijajul Haque, aged about 58 years, son of Md. Jakir Sah, resident of Darji Muhallah, P.O. and P.S. Ichak, District-Hazaribag ...... … Petitioner Versus 1.The State of Jharkhand 2. Md. Alimuddin , son of Ainul Haque, resident of village-Kesda, P.O. and P.S. Tati Jharia, District-Hazaribagh .…. … Opposite Parties -------- CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR DWIVEDI For the Petitioner :None For the State : Mr. Pankaj Kumar, Spl. P.P. 05/ 19.09.2025: On repeated calls nobody appeared on behalf of the petitioner. Learned counsel for the petitioner is present. 2. The present revision application has been filed against the order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge-VII, Hazaribag in S.T. Case No. 57 of 2020, whereby the petition filed by the complainant under section 311 of Cr.P.C. has been allowed. 3. It has been averred in the petition that the impugned order has been mechanically passed by the learned court without applying judicial mind. It has been further stated that the prior to lodging of Complaint Case No. 498 of 2013 regarding murder of Md. Naushad Alam @ Pappu, an F.I.R. has been lodged vide Ichak P.S. Case No. 45 of 2013 registered on 01.03.2013 in which police after investigation submitted final form. It has been further stated that on the complaint petition cognizance has been taken and prosecution has examined seven witnesses and when the case is posted for argument, a petition under 311 Cr.P.C has been filed to prove the signature of P.W.3 and P.W.4 who are inquest witness in Ichak P.S. Case No. 45 of 2013 which was allowed by the learned court. On these grounds, impugned order has been challenged. 4. Mr. Pankaj Kumar, learned counsel for the State submits that there is specific power of the Court and at any stage the said power can be exercised by the learned court if material witnesses are there. 5. In view of above and looking into contents of complaint, it transpires that ( 2025:JHHC:28903 ) the learned court has found that P.W.3 and P.W.4 as well as doctor are material witness as they are witness on the inquest and in view of that said petition has been allowed. 6. Section 311 of Cr.P.C is discretionary power of the court and to come to just conclusion of the case that power can be exercised at any stage. As such there is no illegality in the impugned order. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed. Pending I.A, if any, stands disposed of. ( Sanjay Kumar Dwivedi, J.) satyarthi- Dt. 19.09.2025