Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:101298 Court No. - 86 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 6631 of 2024 Revisionist :- Shashi Bhushan Prasad Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- G.A.,Udai Chandani Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Manjive Shukla,J. 1. Heard Sri Udai Chandani, learned counsel appearing for the revisionist and learned Additional Government Advocate appearing for the State. 2. The instant criminal revision has been filed challenging therein, the order dated 27.09.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Varanasi in Sessions Trial No. 83 of 2008 (State Vs. Ashok Talreja & Others) whereby, the application, filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling P.W. 7, had been rejected for non-prosecution. 3. It has been contended on behalf of the revisionist that the P.W. 7, Dilip Kumar Singh appeared before the trial court on 18.07.2024 and on the said date, he was cross-examined by the lawyer representing other co-accused. The next date for appearance of P.W. 7 was fixed for 19.07.2024 but on the said date, learned counsel representing the revisionist could not appear before the court due to his engagement in other cases and for that reason, an application was filed for giving him the next date for cross-examination of P.W. 7. It has further been contended that the learned trial court on the same day i.e. on 19.07.2024 rejected the revisionist's application for giving him next date for cross- examination of the P.W. 7. 4. In the aforesaid circumstances, the revisionist filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. whereby, request was made to the trial court for recalling the P.W. 7 and allowing the counsel for the revisionist to cross-examine him. The application, filed under Section 311 Cr.P.C., had been rejected for non-prosecution. 5. Learned counsel appearing for the revisionist has argued that the junior to the counsel for the revisionist was very well present before the trial court but in spite of that, the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. had been rejected by the trial court for non- prosecution. It has further been argued that the very purpose of the provisions made under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is that if certain relevant questions could not be asked from the witness or the cross-examination could not done then the trial court may recall the witness for ensuring complete justice in the matter therefore, the trial court ought to have granted opportunity to the revisionist for cross-examination of the P.W. 7. 6. Learned Additional Government Advocate for the State, though has opposed this criminal revision but could not give any justifiable reason for not allowing the revisionist to cross-examine the P.W. 7. 7. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel appearing for the parties and I find that the P.W. 7 appeared before the trial court on 18.07.2024 and on the very next day i.e. on 19.07.2024, learned counsel for the revisionist was granted opportunity to cross-examine him but since he was engaged in other matters, he could not cross-examine the P.W. 7. 8. The revisionist had filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. but that application has been dismissed for want of prosecution, though the order-sheet of the case shows that junior to the counsel representing the revisionist before the trial court was present. Even otherwise the very purpose for making provisions under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is to ensure that proper opportunity for cross-examination of witness is given to the accused and if for some reason, the cross-examination could not be done then the witness may be recalled. 9. This Court is of the view that the trial court must consider and decide the application filed by the revisionist under Section 311 Cr.P.C. on its own merits. 10. In view of the aforesaid reasons, this criminal revision is allowed. The order dated 27.09.2024, passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No. 5, Varanasi in Sessions Trial No. 83 of 2008 (State Vs. Ashok Talreja & Others), is hereby set- aside. 11. The trial court is hereby directed to consider and decide the application filed by the revisionist, under Section 311 Cr.P.C., on its own merits within fifteen days from the date of filing of the certified copy of this order. Order Date :- 1.7.2025/A. Mandhani Digitally signed by :- ABHISHEK MANDHANI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad