Single-judge order under Section 482 Cr.P.C. concerning a request to quash an order allowing prosecution to recall witnesses to fill lacunae. Court issued notice and stayed the impugned order.
Notice issued to opposite party no.2; operation of impugned order stayed.
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. - 13
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 9457 of 2024
Applicant :- Manoj Kumar Pathak Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Deptt. Of Home Lko And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Vijay Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Rajeev Singh,J.
It is further submitted that without mentioning any specific question or point, general averments were made in the application, which clearly amounts to fill up the lacunae of the prosecution, but learned trial Court allowed the application. The P.W.-1 has already been cross-examined in pursuance of the impugned order.
Relying on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Raja Ram Prasad Yadav and State of Bihar and another reported in (2013) 14 SCC 461 at para no.14, learned counsel for the applicant requests for indulgence of this Court.
parties and going through the contents of the application, impugned order as well as application moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C., it is evident from the aforesaid application that no specific point has been mentioned for recalling the witnesses for asking such question from the witnesses as Hon'ble Apex Court has already decided the controversy that application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. should not be entertained only when it was the intention of the prosecuted or other parties to fill up the lacunae. In such circumstances, the matter requires consideration.
Order Date :- 21.11.2024 Arpan
Digitally signed by :- ARPAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recall of witnesses can be used merely to fill up lacuna without specific questions.
Whether to grant stay on the impugned order pending notice to the opposite party.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Raja Ram Prasad Yadav and State of Bihar and anotherReferred¶9
_(2013) 14 SCC 461_ · Who else cites this
3 provisions across 2 enactments
Manoj Kumar Pathak
State Of U.P.
Rajeev Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
