Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:9799 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 44343 of 2024 Applicant :- Tajmeer Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashok Kumar Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Ashok Kumar Singh, the learned counsel for applicant and the learned A.G.A. for State. 2. Perused the record. 3. On the matter being taken up, the learned A.G.A. informs that notice of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. has been served upon first informant opposite party No.2 on 20.12.2024. However, in spite of service of noticeupon 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-Tajmeer, 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 25.11.2024 passed by Additional District and Sessions Judge/Special Judge (POCSO) Jalaun at Orai in Criminal Case No. 07 of 2022, (State Vs. Tajmeer) arising out of Case Crime No. 303 of 2021, u/s 376, 511, I.P.C. and 18/6 (POCSO) Act, P.S.- Kotwali- Kalpi, District- Jalaun, whereby, the application dated 10.09.2024 under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by accused before Court below has been rejected. 5. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. has raised a preliminary objection by submitting that perusal of the application dated 10.09.2024 under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by accused-applicant before Court below will go to show that the specific 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 the relevance of the same. In view of above, the learned A.G.A. submits that since proposed questions have not mentioned in the application under Section 3111 Cr.P.C. nor the relevancy of the said questions has been detailed, therefore, the veracity of application under Section 311 Cr.P.C., on the bona fide of the accused applicant in filing the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. cannot be judged in the light of parameters laid down by the Apex Court in in Raja Ram Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Bihar and Another (2013) 14 SCC 461. 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 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 with reference to the record. As such, 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 :- 21.1.2025 Imtiyaz Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad