- (1.) The present application under section 482 CrPC has been filed challenging the order dated 30.6.2015, passed by the Sessions Judge, JP Nagar (Amroha) in ST No. 417 of 2012, under sections 302, 120B, IPC and 3/4 DP Act, PS Gajraula, District JP Nagar (Amroha), whereby an application filed by the applicant under section 311 CrPC for summoning the PW 1 and PW 3 for further cross-examination has been rejected. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State.
(2.) The said application was filed by the applicant on the ground that certain important questions had not been put to the aforementioned prosecution witnesses, namely PW 1 and PW 3. It has been submitted that the erstwhile counsel had not cross-examined the aforesaid witnesses on certain relevant points. At the stage of final hearing, the subsequently engaged counsel discovered the lapse; therefore, the said application was filed. Insofar as the submission of the learned counsel is concerned, that is not borne out by any material on record. No such averment is contained in the affidavit filed in support of the said application; therefore, this submission is ignored.
(3.) The criminal case pending against the applicant is one under sections 302/120-B IPC. The trial court has rejected the application under section 311 CrPC on the reasoning that the witnesses sought to be recalled had been subjected to lengthy cross-examination. He has further recorded that the matter is an old one and, therefore, he rejected the application. Upon hearing learned counsel for the parties, and upon perusal of the record, I do not see any illegality in the impugned order. The application under section 311 CrPC appears to be an attempt to delay the disposal of the case itself.;