##PAGE1##

HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD

CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 2785 of 2026

Sachin

.....Revisionist(s)

Versus

State Of U.P. And 2 Others

.....Opposite

Party(s)

Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Akhileshwar Pratap Singh, Santosh

Kumar Shukla

Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A.

Court No. - 86

HON'BLE SUBHASH CHANDRA SHARMA, J.

Heard learned counsel for the revisionists as well as learned A.G.A. on the

point of admission.

The present criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist with prayer to

allow the revision and set aside the impugned judgment and order dated

02.02.2026 passed by learned Additional Session Judge/Special Judge

(Dacodity Affected Area), Budaun in Special Session Case No. 668 of 2020

(State Vs. Rohit and others), under Section 392 IPC and also allow the

application dated 12.01.2026 filed by the revisionist under Section 311

Cr.P.C. /348 BNSS to summon the opposite party no. 3 for re-examination.

It is submitted by learned counsel for the revisionist that in this case, the

P.W. 2 was examined before the learned trial court but some questions were

left unasked on the part of the accused/revisionist that was the reason an

application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was moved before the learned trial

court to recall the witness for further cross-examination on the points

mentioned in the application, since no such evidence has come on record.

The learned trial court has rejected the application on the ground that the

witness cannot be recalled for fulfilling the discrepancies. Further submitted

that the powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C. are conferred on the learned trial

court and also on the appellate court as well as revisional court to recall the

witness for just decision of the case but the learned trial court has failed to

exercise the jurisdiction while passing the order in question. The learned

counsel for the revisionist has relied his argument on the case decided by

CRLR No. 2785 of 2026

2

Hon'ble Supreme Court in Harendra Rai Vs. State of Bihar and other,

(2023) 12 Supreme Court case 563 and request to set aside the order passed

by learned trial court and allow the revision.

Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer as aforesaid and contended that in this

case, the examination in chief of the P.W. 2 was recorded before the learned

trial court and full opportunity of cross examination was given to the

defence. The defence cross examined the witness in detail and the statement

was completed on 11.09.2025, thereafter present application has been moved

by the revisionist/accused to recall the witness for asking the questions on

some points. Since the full opportunity was availed by the defence for cross-

examination of the witness and it was done, therefore, the witness cannot be

re-summoned for recross-examination only for the purposes of fulfilling the

lacuna unless its re-examination or recall is not for the purposes of just

decision of the case in the opinion of the court. The learned trial court has

exercised its power lawfully and there is no any illegality in the order dated

2.2.2026 passed by learned trial court but this revision is devoid of merit.

On considering the facts and circumstances of the case, submissions made

by learned counsel for the revisionist as well as learned A.G.A. perusal of

record, the contents of application, order passed by learned trial court dated

02.02.2026, the statement of the witness P.W. 2 dated 11.09.2025, it appears

that the examination in chief of P.W. 2 was got recorded before the learned

trial court and an opportunity of cross examination was given to the defence.

The defence has asked the questions to the witness who has replied the

questions and cross-examination was recorded in full before the learned trial

court and it was completed. Later on, the application for recall of the same

witness has been moved by the accused/revisionsit mentioning some points

in the application to make further cross-examination on those points and

therefore requested to recall the witness and afford him further opportunity

of cross examinatio