Dismissed

Mantasha v. State of U.P.

Allahabad HC18 Jan 2023A482/37437/2022

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

In this Section 482 criminal proceedings, the High Court of Allahabad dismissed an applicant's recall as a prosecution witness application. The court held that without specific grounds showing need for further evidence, the application lacked merit. The applicant attained majority but provided no facts requiring additional testimony.

What did the court decide?

Application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. seeking recall as witness dismissed.

Mantasha Vs State of U.P. — Criminal Trial and Appeal | Allahabad HC (2023)

¶1

Court No. - 64

¶2

Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 37437 of 2022

¶3

Applicant :- Mantasha Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Ramanuj Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶4

Hon'ble Saumitra Dayal Singh,J.

¶5

Heard learned counsel for the applicant and the learned AGA for the State.

¶6

Present application has been filed to assail the order dated 03.11.2022 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge-I Gautam Budh Nagar in Sessions Trial No. 634 of 2015 arising out of Case Crime No. 503 of 2015 under Sections 302/34, 201 IPC, Police Station Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar whereby the application filed by the applicant seeking her own recall as witness in the above sessions trial, has been rejected.

¶7

In the trial proceedings, the applicant's father is standing trial for the murder of his wife. Occurrence is of the date 16.7.2015. The dead body was recovered from inside the bed of the accused/father of the present applicant. At that stage, the applicant was about 11 years of age. In any case, at the trial the applicant was examined as prosecution witness on 02.9.2016. She was cross examined at length on 14.9.2017. Thereafter, other prosecution witnesses were also examined. Upon closure of prosecution evidence, statement of the accused was also recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C. on 07.6.2022. When the trial became ripe for hearing that too upon directions issued by this Court to expedite the proceedings, an application came to be made by the present applicant seeking her recall as a witness.

¶8

Besides stating, applicant has attained the age of majority and had developed a better understanding, no fact circumstance has

¶9

been indicated as to why further evidence would ever be required to be adduced by the applicant when the prosecution has not claimed such requirement.

¶10

The application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. may never be allowed only to allow the witness to lead other or further evidence de hors its need at the trial. In absence of any good ground shown, application lacks merit and is dismissed .

¶11

Order Date :- 18.1.2023 Faraz

¶12

Digitally signed by :- FARAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Mantasha v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Mantasha v. State of U.P.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Smt. Asha Devi and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Bal Govind Vs State of U.P.and Another

Mohammad Aslam and 2 Others Vs State of U.P. and Another

Rajesh Sahu Vs State of U.P. and 3 Others

Pradeep Kumar Vs State of U.P. . and Another

Naresh Chandra Vs State of U.P. and Another