Mohammad Aslam vs State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief ...
2023 Latest Caselaw 23610 ALL

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD, LUCKNOW BENCH
 
 


?Neutral Citation No. - 2023:AHC-LKO:57436
 
Court No. - 12
 

 
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 8604 of 2023
 

 
Applicant :- Mohammad Aslam
 
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Addl. Chief Secy. Deptt. Of Home Govt. Of U.P. Civil Sectt. Lko And Others
 
Counsel for Applicant :- Ajai Vikram Singh,Laxmi Narayan Gupta
 
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
 

 
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.

1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State.

2. The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is filed with the prayer to quash order dated 28.3.2023 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge, Court No.15, Hardoi in Criminal Case No.16 of 2019.

3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that learned court below rejected the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recall of the witness, P.W.2/victim but the court below rejected the same. He further relied on the judgment of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Varsha Garg Vs. The State of M.P. & Ors. passed in Criminal Appeal No.1021 of 2022 and submits that a witness can be recalled for substantial justice under Section 311 Cr.P.C. and also submits that five questions were placed before the court below on which, cross examination of the victim is necessary, therefore, indulgence of this Court is necessary.

4. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer of the applicant and submits that ample opportunities were given to the applicant for cross examining the victim and all these questions mentioned in the application were narrated in the deposition of the victim and only with the intention to fill up the lacunae of deposition of the victim, application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. cannot be allowed, therefore, there is no illegality in the order passed by the court below. He further submits that law relied by the counsel for the applicant is not applicable as the power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is not disputed but it is well settled by the Apex Court that only with the intention to fill up the lacunae, application cannot be considered.

5. Considering the submissions of learned counsel for the parties, going through the record as well as other relevant documents, it is evident from the deposition of P.W.1 that she was examined and cross examined and all these questions were categorically narrated by the victim in her deposition and only on the ground that new counsel has been engaged, therefore, witness is to be recalled is not correct, therefore, no case of interference is made out, accordingly, the present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is dismissed.

Order Date :- 28.8.2023

Gaurav/-