JUDGMENT : SANJAY PRIYA, J. 1. Petitioners are aggrieved by order dated 05.11.2015 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, VI, Aurangabad, in Sessions Trial No.419 of 2015 by which petition filed by the Petitioners under Section 311 Cr. P.C. to recall PW 1 for further cross-examination has been rejected. 2. Heard the parties. 3. This Court finds that the Court below has rejected the petition filed by the Petitioners under Section 311 Cr. P.C. by the impugned order on the ground that there is no provision in the Evidence Act for further cross-examination unless either reexamination-in-chief is done by the prosecution or some new fact comes after discharge of the witness. The Court below has mentioned in the impugned order that PW 1, Rahdey Shyam Sharma, was cross-examined fully by the defence and he was discharged. 4. Counsel for the Petitioners refers to Anneuxre-3, which is the petition filed by the Informant after his evidence as PW 1. Thereafter, petition under Section 311 Cr. P.C. was filed to recall PW 1 for further cross-examination. 5. This Court is of the view that trial in the Court cannot proceed at the whims and desire of the Informant. The Informant has filed petition after he was examined, cross-examined and discharged. It is not permissible in law for Informant to file any subsequent petition to fill lacunae either to improve or demolish the prosecution case. 6. In view of such, this Court does not find any illegality in the impugned order. 7. This application is, accordingly, dismissed. 8. The Court below will proceed with the case in accordance with law.