Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:28443 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 35944 of 2024 Applicant :- Mohammad Yakoob Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Amar Nath Singh,Sundaram Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Amar Nath Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicant-Mohammad Yakoob, who is a charge sheeted accused and facing trial before court below, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 17.9.2024 passed by Additional District & Sessions Judge/ Fast Track Court Ist, Basti in Sessions Trial no. 120 of 2018 (State Vs. Mohammad Yakoob & others), arising out of Case Crime No. 52 of 2018, under sections 147, 452, 302, 504, 506, 120B I.P.C. Police Station-Rudhauli, District-Basti whereby the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by applicant before court below to recall P.W. 2 Dinanath, has been rejected. 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection by contending that court below in the order impugned dated 17.09.2024 has recorded a categorical finding that the questions, which are proposed to be put to P.W.-2, have already been asked at the time of examination-in-chief of P.W.-2. He therefore contends that the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by applicant before court below was wholly misconceived. To buttress his submission, he has referred to the judgement of Apex Court in Raja Ram Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Bihar and another (2013) 14 SCC 461 and on basis thereof, he submits that when the bonafide of applicant in filing aforementioned application is examined in the light of the parameters laid down by the Apex Court in aforementioned judgement, it is apparent that there was absolutely no bonafide on the part of applicant in filing application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. As such, no illegality has been committed by court below in passing the order impugned. 5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is not only borne out from the record but furthermore, the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant. As such no occasion arises before this Court to entertain the present application. 7. As a result, present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 8. It is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 28.2.2025 YK Digitally signed by :- YASHWANT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad