Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:37621 Court No. - 15 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 3961 of 2025 Applicant :- Ajay Pratap Singh Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Its Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Sukh Deo Singh,Paritosh Shukla Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Subhash Vidyarthi,J. 1. Heard Sri Dharmendra Kumar Yadav, Advocate holding brief of Sri Suresh Kumar Yadav, the learned counsel for the applicants as well as Sri Arun Kumar Verma, the learned A.G.A. and perused the record. 2. By means of the order dated 14.05.2025, this Court had ordered issuance of notice to the opposite party No.2. The office has reported that as per the report of C.J.M., Raibareli, notice stands served on the opposite party No.2-Sri Chandra Kesh Singh had expired on 19.04.2016 and the notice has been served on his wife but no body has put in appearance to oppose the application. 3. However, in these circumstances, this Court proceeds to consider the application on its merits. 4. By means of the instant application filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C., the applicant has challenged validity of an order dated 18.04.2025 passed by the First Additional Session Judge, Raibareli in Session Trial No.39 of 2008 whereby an application filed by the applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling PW-9 for cross-examination has been rejected. 5. PW-9 is a retired Sub-Inspector of Police and his examination-in- chief was conducted on 05.04.2025. Applicant's counsel was not present in the court on that date and the applicant was present and he sought an adjournment so as to enable him to get PW-9 cross- examined through his counsel. This application was rejected by the trial Court. 6. On 14.04.2025, the applicant filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling PW-9 so as to enable the applicant to cross- examine him. While rejecting this application, the trial Court on has recorded in the impugned order dated 18.04.2025 that although the accused persons had prior knowledge that statement of PW-9 would be recorded on 05.04.2025, no persons was present to cross-examine PW-9 and no application for adjournment was filed on their behalf. Co-accused Sanjay Pratap Singh was present before the Court but the applicant was not present before the trial Court. The trial Court further observed that the trial is pending since the year 2008 and it is one of the cases covered by the action plan prepared by the High Court regarding which the Hon'ble High Court has issued direction for expeditious disposal. The trial Court has also recorded that the accused persons have sought an opportunity to cross-examine PW-9 on the ground that their counsel comes from another district. The trial Court had expressed the view that the accused persons are free to engage an Advocate of their choice but they are responsible to ensure presence of their counsel for participation in the proceedings. 7. Having considered the entire facts and circumstances of the case, I find no illegality and irregularity in the aforesaid reasons assigned by the trial Court while passing the order dated 18.04.2025. 8. In absence of any illegality in the aforesaid order, I am of the view that the application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. lacks merit and the same is hereby dismissed. . (Subhash Vidyarthi,J.) Order Date :- 3.7.2025/-Amit K- Digitally signed by :- AMIT KUMAR High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench