HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD
?Court No. – 70
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. – 28265 of 2019
Applicant :- Girdhari Lal
Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And Another
Counsel for Applicant :- Mohd. Irfan
Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon’ble Sanjay Kumar Singh,J.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned Additional Government Advocate for the State/opposite party no.1 and perused the record with the assistance of learned counsel for the parties.
This application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed by the applicant with a prayer to quash the order dated 05.07.2019 passed by Additional Sessions Judge/F.T.C., Rampur in Session Trial No. 220 of 2008 (State Vs. girdhari Lal and others) arising out of case crime no. 57 of 2006, under Sectionsections 498A, Section307 IPC and 3/4 D.P. Act, Police Station Swar, District Rampur.
It is submitted by the learned counsel for the applicant that by the impugned order dated 05.07.2019, the application dated 5.7.2019 (95 kha) of the accused/applicant for recalling the PW-1 and PW-2 under Sectionsection 311 Cr.P.C. has been illegally rejected. He further submits that without giving proper opportunity of cross-examination to the applicant, the evidence of PW-1 and PW-2 has been closed, therefore, in the interest of justice one more opportunity should be given to the applicant to cross-examine the PW-1 and PW-2, but the trial court has illegally rejected the application of the applicant.
Per contra, learned AGA refuting the aforesaid submissions advanced on behalf of the applicant, vehemently opposed by contending that the trial is at advance stage and full opportunity of cross-examination had already been given to the accused/applicant. The application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been moved by the accused/applicant for ulterior purposes with a view to linger on the proceedings and there is no merit in the submissions of the learned counsel for the applicant, as the same is against the evidence on record, hence the application is liable to be dismissed.
After having heard the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and perusing the impugned order dated 05.07.2019, I find that detailed order has been passed by the trial court considering all the relevant facts and circumstances of the case and specific finding has been recorded by the trial court that the trial of this case is pending since 2008 and charges were framed on 08.09.2008. Examination-in-chief of PW-1, Smt. Kamlesh was recorded on 08.08.2012 and examination-in-chief of PW-2 was recorded on 30.9.2016. Thereafter, several opportunities were given to the accused persons to cross-examine the prosecution witness, but they have adopted delaying tactics. It is also mentioned that already on 27.9.2016, 30.9.2016 and 30.10.2016, opportunity to cross-examination was given to the accused persons, but counsel for the accused did not turn up. The opportunity of cross-examination to the PW-1 was closed on 4.9.2012 and opportunity of cross-examination of PW-2 was closed 7.10.2016, but the application has been moved on 5.7.2019 after much delay without any explanation of delay.
After going through the impugned order dated 5.7.2017, this Court is of the view that observations and findings recorded by the trial court in the impugned order dated 5.7.2019 is not liable to be interfered on the facts and circumstances of the case. There is no manifest error of law or perversity in the order dated 5.7.2019, as the same is impeccable.
The application lacks merit and is, accordingly, dismissed.
Order Date :- 23.7.2019