Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record.
This revision has filed for quashing the impugned order dated 11.07.2019 passed by the Special Judge, P.C. Act, Court No.5/Additional Sessions Judge, Lucknow in S.T. No. 447 of 2006 (State vs. Ramesh Raidas) by which the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., filed by the revisionist has been rejected in respect of Crime No. 146 of 2005, under Section 302 I.P.C., P.S. Mall, District Lucknow.
Learned counsel for the revisionist submitted that from the statement of PW-3, new evidence came into the knowledge for which the application dated 06.06.2019 was moved before the court below for recalling PW-3, but without considering the grievance of the revisionist, the revision was rejected.
Learned A.G.A. opposes the argument contended by the counsel for revisionist and submits that the evidence of Smt. Meera, PW-3 was concluded in the year 2007 and he further submitted that no specific fact and reasons are mentioned in the revision for recording the statement of PW-3, Smt. Meera.
Considering the above mentioned facts and arguments for learned counsel for parties and material available on record.
It is evident that revision was moved by the revisionist for recording the statement of PW-3, Smt. Meera, but learned court below has specifically mentioned in the impugned order that the file is at the stage of recording the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C., and only with the intention to delay the proceedings, the application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. was moved.
Hence, there is no illegality in the order passed by the court below.
Accordingly, the revision fails and hereby rejected.
Order Date :- 27.8.2019 S. Shivhare