- (1.) HEARD learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
(2.) THE present application arises out of S.T. No.61 of 2007 under Section 302 IPC and it has been filed being aggrieved against the order dated 27.01.2014 by virtue of which the application filed by the applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected.
(3.) HAVING perused the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., the copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 1 and also the impugned order copy of which has been annexed as Annexure 2 to the affidavit. It is apparent that the Court below while rejecting application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has given cogent reasons for rejecting the application itself. A perusal of the order shows elaborate reasons has been given for rejecting application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. A perusal of order shows that various dates were fixed but the accused never took pains of cross -examination and the present application has been filed only with the intention of delaying the proceeding/trial. A perusal of order shows that even though various dates were fixed for argument, however, on one ground or another, continuous adjournments have been sought. No illegality or perversity has been pointed out with the said findings recorded by the Court below and even otherwise the impugned order dated 27.01.2014 is a well reasoned and well discussed order and thus, this Court finds no good ground for interference with the impugned order dated 27.01.2014 in exercise of its inherent power under Section 482 Cr.P.C.;