Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2016 DIGILAW 1069 (ALL)

Lokendra Singh v. State of U. P.

2016-03-28

OM PRAKASH VII

body2016
JUDGMENT Om Prakash-VII,J. The present revision has been filed with the prayer to quash the order dated 1.3.2016 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.20, Agra in S.T. No. 1452 of 2008 under Sections 307, 323, 325, 504 IPC, P.S. New Agra, District Agra whereby the application under Section 311 CrPC moved by the applicant (accused) to summon the affidavits said to have been filed by the complainant, his father and mother before the Senior Superintendent of Police, Agra for the purpose of cross-examination has been rejected. Further prayer has been made to stay the effect and operation of the aforesaid order. 2. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist as well as the learned AGA appearing for the State. 3. It is submitted by the learned counsel for the revisionist that by the order dated 1.3.2016, the concerned court below has illegally rejected the application under Section 311 CrPC of the revisionist (accused). Application under Section 311 CrPC can be moved at any stage of trial and it is incumbent upon the court below to allow the same and provide opportunity to the applicant to lead evidence/cross-examine the witness on the basis of such documents. 4. On the other hand, learned AGA submitted that there is no infirmity or illegality in the impugned order. Hence, no interference is warranted by this court in the matter. 5. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, after perusing the entire record including the impugned order, and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties, and also keeping in view the stage of trial, I am of the opinion that the impugned order does not suffer from any infirmity or illegality. The revisionist (accused) has opportunity to lead evidence at appropriate stage (defence evidence). If any application in this regard is moved by the revisionist at appropriate stage, the same be considered by the court below. No ground is made out. The revision being devoid of merits is liable to be dismissed and the same is accordingly dismissed at this stage.