JEESHAN Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri M.P. Singh Yadav, holding brief of Sri Mohammad Waseem, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri Vinod Kant, learned Additional Advocate General along with Sri Arvind Kumar, learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State-opposite party.

(2.) The present application under Sec. 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed seeking to quash the order dtd. 12/8/2021 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO Act) Court No.1, District Bareilly in Special Case No. 10 of 2020, arising out of Case Crime No. 154 of 2018 (State vs. Jeeshan) under Ss. 363, 366, 376 (2) N IPC and Sec. 3/4 of Protection of Children from Sexual Offences Act, 2012[1], Police Station Hafizganj, District Bareilly on the application filed by the applicant under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C. dtd. 10/8/2021 and also to direct the court below to re-consider the application filed by the applicant under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C. dtd. 10/8/2021.

(3.) The order dtd. 12/8/2021 dismissing the application filed by the applicant herein under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C. has taken notice of the fact that the examination-in-chief of PW-2 (victim) was recorded on 21/1/2021 and on the same date the counsel for the accused-applicant had cross-examined her. The court has also recorded that the accused-applicant has sought recall of the witness who has been already examined on the earlier date as PW-2. It has also been taken note that the cross- examination of the other witnesses is continuing and information regarding the questions which are sought to be put to PW-2, can be elicited from the other witnesses. Considering that the matter is pending since the year 2018 an inference has been drawn that the application filed under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C. is only to delay the proceedings. The court below further taking note that the trial is under POCSO Act which contains a provision for concluding the proceedings expeditiously, has concluded that there was no reason to allow the application under Sec. 311 Cr.P.C. seeking recall of the witness and accordingly the same has been rejected.