Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:6037 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 38820 of 2024 Applicant :- Sonu Singh Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Roshani Dwivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Ms. Roshani Dwivedi, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Perused the record. 3. Supplementary affidavit filed by the learned counsel for applicant in Court today, is taken on record. 4. Applicant-Sonu Singh, who is a charge sheeted accused, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the order dated 02.09.2024 passed by Additional Sessions Judge IV, Jaunpur in Sessions Trial No. 307 of 2015 (State Vs. Virendra Singh and others) arising out of Case Crime No.469 of 2015, under Sections 147, 148, 302, 307 352 I.P.C., Police Station Sikrara, District Jaunpur, whereby, the application dated 03.02.2024 filed by accused applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected. 5. Learned counsel for applicant submits that the order impugned in present application is manifestly illegal inasmuch as the entire deposition of the prosecution witnesses was recorded in the absence of applicant or his counsel. As such, no credible evidence was recorded against applicant before Court below. On the above premise, it is thus urged by the learned counsel for applicant that application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by applicant was liable to be allowed. Even otherwise no prejudice can be said to be vacated to the prosecution if the proposed witness is recorded, as such, an exercise would be in conformity with the principles of natural justice. 6. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for State-opposite party-1 has vehemently opposed the present application. Learned A.G.A. submits that prior to the application dated 03.02.2024 applicant had earlier filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. which was rejected by Court below vide order dated 03.08.2019. However, the order dated 03.09.2019 was neither challenged by applicant before the higher forum nor copy of the said order has been brought on record. It is next contended by the learned A.G.A. that in view of above the second application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by accused applicant was not maintainable. Learned A.G.A. has then invited the attention of Court to the order impugned and with reference to above, he submits that court below has recorded categorical findings in the impugned order. The first finding is to the effect that on the date of framing of charge order passed by Court below, accused applicant was present in Court alongwith his counsel. The Court has further recorded a finding that the deposition of the prosecution witnesses namely PW-1 to PW-8, was recorded in the presence of accused applicant Sonu. However, both the findings have not been categorically impugned in the affidavit filed in support of this application nor the same could be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant during course of argument as being illegal, perverse or erroneous. In the absence of any challenge to the findings returned by Court below, the challenge laid to the order impugned is wholly misconceived. According to the learned A.G.A., it is by now well settled that if the findings cannot be dislodged the conclusion can be altered. Since, findings/reasoning returned by Court below remain intact, no interference is warranted by this Court in present application. 7. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. 8. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. in opposition to this application are not only borne out from the record but furthermore the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant. As such, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. 9. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 10. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 9.1.2025 Imtiyaz Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad