NIVEESH KUMAR Vs. STATE OF U P

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Sri Sanjay Kumar Yadav, learned counsel for the applicant and Sri I.P. Srivastava, learned AGA for the State and perused the record.

(2.) The present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been filed for quashing the impugned order dated 14.11.2017 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Firozabad and recall the witnesses P.W.1 S.I. Raj Kumar, P.W.2 S.I. Ajay Kumar, P.W.3 S.I. Vijay Pal Singh and P.W.4 S.I. Krishna Murari Verma u/s 311 Cr.P.C. in S.T. No.510 of 2015 arising out of case crime no.446 of 2014 u/s 18/20 N.D.P.S. Act, P.S. Jasrana, district Firozabad pending before Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Firozabad.

(3.) It has been contended by the learned counsel for the applicant that application for cross-examination of four prosecution witnesses P.W.1 S.I. Raj Kumar, P.W.2 S.I. Ajay Kumar, P.W.3 S.I. Vijay Pal Singh and P.W.4 S.I. Krishna Murari Verma has been rejected by the trial court. The petitioner was already confined in jail in a case u/s 302 IPC, hence he could not cross-examine the said prosecution witnesses. The applicant has been acquitted in the case u/s 302 IPC. If the applicant is not allowed to cross-examine the said prosecution witnesses, his defence would be prejudiced as it is necessary for fair trial. The impugned order rejecting the application for cross-examination of prosecution witnesses passed by the trial Court is illegal and the same should be set aside. He further submits that the applicants are ready to deposit the cost for recalling the aforesaid prosecution witnesses.