- (1.) Heard learned counsel for the applicant; the learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record.
(2.) The instant application has been filed seeking quashing of an order dated 16.04.2015 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Court No.8, Azamgarh in S.T. No. 461 of 2013 by which the application No. 26 Kha? to enable the counsel for the applicant to cross-examine Seema Sharma and Vikas Sharma (the prosecution witnesses), whose statements were recorded while the counsels were on strike, has been rejected.
(3.) The submission of the learned counsel for the applicant is that on 11.03.2015 when the examination-in-chief of the aforesaid two witnesses was recorded, the lawyers were on strike and therefore no one had appeared to cross-examine the said witnesses and the right to cross-examination was closed, therefore, in the interest of justice application 26 Kha was moved by the applicant to summon those witnesses for allowing their cross-examination, which has been wrongly rejected by the court below on the ground that if such application is allowed then it would encourage the lawyers to be on strike.;