SUBODH DUBEY Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the Petitioners as well as learned A.G.A. appearing for the State Respondent and have perused the record.

(2.) By means of this petition the accused-Petitioners have challenged the orders dated 7.9.2009 and 21.10.2009, passed by the sessions court whereby the application of the accused-Petitioners for recall and re-examination of a witness under Section 311, Code of Criminal Procedure has been rejected.

(3.) The accused-Petitioners have been charged under Section 302/201 read with Section 34, I.P.C. regarding which trial has been going on since the year 2005. The witness in question who is sought to be recalled is P.W. 5 Bajrang Bali Yadav who was examined on 8.1.2008, 25.2.2008 and 9.2.2009. Thereafter, on 27.8.2009 an application was filed by the accused-Petitioners for recalling the said witness merely on the ground that : "due to over sight some questions regarding the statements of P.W. 1, P.W. 2 and P.W. 3 recorded by the Investigating Officer Bajrang Bali Yadav could not be put to him". Alongwith the said application of the accused-Petitioners, another application for producing a defence witness had also been made. By an order dated 7.9.2009 the Sessions Court allowed the application of the accused-Petitioners for producing the defence witness, whereas it rejected the application under Section 311, Code of Criminal Procedure for recall and reexamination of the witness P.W. 5 Bajrang Bali Yadav primarily on the ground that there was delay in moving the application and that the statement and cross-examination of the said witness ran into 12 pages and that no good ground has been shown in the application for invoking the jurisdiction under Section 311, Code of Criminal Procedure.