Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:7484 Court No. - 16 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 141 of 2025 Revisionist :- Sandeep Kumar Shukla @ Sandeep Shukla Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 2 Others Counsel for Revisionist :- Ramendra Kumar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Karunesh Singh Pawar,J. Heard learned counsel for the revisionist and learned A.G.A. for the respondent State. Notices to respondent nos. 2 and 3 are dispensed with in view of the proposed order. The present revision under Section 397, 401 Cr.P.C./438, 442 BNSS against the order dated 13.12.2024 passed by the Additional District and Session Judge/Fast Track Court Second,. Lucknow in S.T. No.1500077/2013, State of U.P. versus Atul Shrivastava and other, Case Crime No.234 of 2011, under Section 366, 376 I.P.C., Police Station Itaunja, District Lucknow. Perused the record. Relevant portion of the impugned order dated 13.12.2024 by which the application filed by the revisionist under section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected by the learned court below is extracted below:- " उपररक ववधध वयवसथथओओ कक पकथश मम अवभययक दथरथ वदयक गए पथथरनथ पत मम जर कथरण उवलधखत वकयथ गयथ हह वह कथरण बचथव पक कक सओजथन मम पपवर सक हह अवशय रहथ हरगथ। बचथव पक कर धजरह कथ पपणर एवओ पयथरप अवसर पथप हरनक पर भह उनकक दथरथ वथओवछत पशन कयय नहह पपछक जथ सकक । बचथव पक कक ओर सक पसतयत सथकह डह डबलप, 1 अरववनद कय मथर कक सथकय कथ अओकन भह वदनथओक 29.08 2023 कर वकयथ गयथ पथथरनथ- पत अनतगरत धथरथ 311 द०प०सओ० बचथव पक दथरथ वदनथओक 09.05.2024 कर लगभग 08 (आठ) मथह कक उपरथनत वदयथ गयथ हह, जर वक मथत पतथयलह कक वनसतथरण मम ववलमब कथररत करनक कक उदकशय सक दकनथ पतहत हरतथ हह। मथमलक मम अवभयरजन सथकय पपणर हर चयकथ हह। पसतयत सत परहकण वरर 2013 सक समबननधत हह। उक सथकह कर ररककल न वकयक Session Trial/1500077/2013-State of UP Vs. Atul Srivastava & others जथनक सक पसतयत सत परहकण मम अनयथय नहह हरगथ एवओ न हह अवभययक कक अधधकथरय पर करई पवतकप ल पभथव पडकगथ। अतत पथथरनथ पत वदनथओवकत 09.05.2024 अनतगरत धथरथ 311 द०प०सओ० सवहकथर वकए जथनक यरगय नहह हह। आदकश पथथरनथ- पत वदनथओवकत 09.05.2024 अनतगरत धथरथ 311 द०प०सओ० वनरसत वकयथ जथतथ हह।" Perusal of the aforesaid order shows that examination of P.W. 1 took place on 15.4.2013 and cross was also done from him by the counsel for the co-accused and on behalf of the revisionist cross examination was done on 28.6.2013. Likewise, the victim was also examined on 30.9.2013. The victim was cross examined on several dates and ultimately on 22.7.2014 she was cross examined by the counsel for the revisionist and not only this, D.W.1 Arvind Kumar was examined on 29.8.2023. This application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is being given after eight months from the date of examination of D.W.1. I have also perused the application filed by the revisionist before the learned trial court under section 311 Cr.P.C. There is no explanation of any delay as to why the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been given after such a delay. The prosecution evidence has been closed long back. No reason has been assigned by the accused in their application filed under Section 311 Cr,.P.C. for non-examination of witnesses also neither any reason has been given as to why the application has been moved after such a delay, therefore, re-summoning of witnesses at belated stage has been deprecated by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Ratan Lal vs. Prahlad Jat and others, (2017) 9 SCC 340. It has been held that the delay in filing the application is one of the important factors which has to be explained in the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. moved by the accused. There appears to be no illegality in the order impugned. The revision, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 5.2.2025 Madhu D.R/P.S Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench Digitally signed by :- MADHU KUMARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench