The single judge in Agra dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. seeking to quash an order rejecting a fresh Section 311 Cr.P.C. application. The court held no illegality or perversity since the trial was at the final argument stage.
The application was dismissed as it is not liable to be allowed at this stage of the trial.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 74
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 45153 of 2019
Applicant :- Dinesh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Om Prakash-VII,J.
This Application U/S 482 has been filed for quashing the order dated 8.11.2019 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 6, Agra in S.T. No. 684 of 2016 (State Vs. Mahesh and others), under Sections 498-A, 304-B IPC and Section 3/4 D. P. Act, Police Station Khandauli, district Agra. Further prayer has been made to stay further proceedings of the aforesaid Sessions Trial.
Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A..
Earlier applicant had approached before this Court invoking jurisdiction under Section 482 Cr.P.C. through Application U/S 482 No. 10068 of 2019 which was dismissed vide order dated 8.4.2019 observing that order passed on the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. moved by the applicant before the Trial Court is in accordance with law. It appears that applicant again moved fresh application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. disclosing the questions sought to be asked from the witnesses concerned. Trial Court after hearing the parties vide impugned order rejected the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. observing that application has been moved only to delay the trial. Lengthy cross examination has been made from the witness concerned. Trial is at the stage of the argument. If the observations recorded by the Trial Court in the impugned order are taken into consideration no illegality, infirmity or perversity is found. Applicant cannot be permitted at this stage to fill up the lacuna putting fresh question from the prosecution witness.
Thus, the application is not liable to be allowed and same is dismissed.
Order Date :- 7.12.2019 Sachdeva
3 issues framed by the court
Whether the high court should quash the impugned order rejecting the applicant section 311 Cr.P.C. application filed to ask fresh questions from prosecution witnesses.
Whether the trial court committed any illegality, infirmity or perversity in holding that the application was moved to delay the trial.
Whether the applicant can be permitted at the final argument stage to fill up a lacuna by putting fresh questions from the prosecution witness.
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Dinesh
State of U.P.
Om Prakash
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
