JUDGMENT Hon'ble Mahendra Dayal, J. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The petitioner has assailed the order dated 19.4.2013, passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.10, Pratapgarh in Sessions Trial No. 570 of 2011, arising out of Case Crime No. 200 of 2010, under Sections 307, 323, 504, 506 IPC, relating to P.S. Lalganj, District Pratapgarh, pending in the court of Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.10, Pratapgarh. 3. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the petitioner is the injured prosecution witness and when his examination-in-chief was being recorded the relevant question with regard to injury has not been asked and as such he should be recalled and re-examined. 4. A perusal of the impugned order indicates that the application of the petitioner has not only been opposed by the District Government Counsel but also by the accused person. A copy of the application moved under Section 311 IPC has been annexed with this petition which indicates that the said application has not been moved through State Counsel and the learned trial court while rejecting that application has also observed in the impugned order that it has not been specified in the application as to what has left to be stated when the examination-in-chief was being recorded. 5. Having heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. and also having gone through the impugned order, I do not find any merit in the present petition. 6. According the petition is hereby dismissed.