Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:26899 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 43387 of 2024 Applicant :- Vikas Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Adil Jamal,Shabeh Jamal Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Adil Jamal, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Perused the record. 3. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. submits that notice of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been served upon first informant opposite party No.2 on 14.12.2024. However, in spite of service of notice upon first informant opposite party-2 neither any counter affidavit has been filed by first informant/opposite party No.2 nor anyone has put appearance on his behalf to oppose this application even in revised call 4. Applicant-Vikas, 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 29.11.2024 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act), Addl. Sessions Judge, Court No.2, Moradabad in Special Sessions Trial No. 1858 of 2011 (State of U.P. Vs. Vikas) arising out of Case Crime No.397 of 2023, under Sections 363, 366 & 376 I.P.C., and Section 3/4 POCSO Act, Police Station Civil Lines, District Moradabad, whereby, an application filed by accused applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected. 5. On the matter being taken up, the learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection by submitting that perusal of application dated 29.11.2024 under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by accused- applicant before Court below, will go to show that the questions proposed to be put to the witnesses have not been mentioned therein. Since, the proposed questions have not been mentioned in the application, therefore there is no averment regarding relevancy of the same. Referring to the judgment of Supreme Court in Raja Ram Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Bihar and Another (2013) 14 SCC 461, the learned A.G.A. thus submits that in the absence of above, the veracity of the application aforementioned cannot be examined in the light of parameters laid down in above judgment of Supreme Court. As such, no illegality has been committed by Court below in rejecting the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by accused applicant. Consequently, the present application is liable to be rejected. 6. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for applicants, 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 with reference to the record. In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. 8. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 9. It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 24.2.2025 Imtiyaz Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad