Hon’ble Manoj Misra, J.—Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.

2. Considering the nature of the order that is being passed as also the ground on which it is being passed both the parties are agreeable that the matter be disposed of finally at this stage itself otherwise inviting counter-affidavit would only delay the proceeding.

3. The instant application, under Section 482 Cr.P.C., has been filed challenging the order dated 11.3.2015 passed by the Fast Track Court, Kanpur Nagar in S.T. No. 1560 of 2008 (State v. Pradeep Kumar and others) whereby the application of the applicant, who is an accused, for summoning the expert, who gave the report with regards to viscera examination of the deceased, as a defense witness, has been rejected on the ground that the defense evidence has already been closed and the application appears to have been moved with an intent to delay the conclusion of the trial.

4. The impugned order has been assailed by the learned counsel for the applicant on the ground that the report of the forensic expert only disclosed presence of aluminum phosphide in the viscera without disclosing its percentage