Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC-LKO:48873 Court No. - 14 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 6705 of 2025 Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar @ Kallu Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Prin. Secy. Home Lko. And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ashish Mishra,Sanjeev Trivedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Shree Prakash Singh,J. 1. Under challenge is the order dated 26.06.2025 by which the learned trial court has rejected the application of the applicant under Section 311 of CrPC. 2. Contention of learned counsel for the applicant is that the two witnesses, namely, Manju and Ganga Ram have not been produced by the prosecution though they are the important witnesses. He added that the application under Section 311 of CrPC has been rejected by the learned trial court in a cursory manner and no reason has been assigned. 3. In support of his contention, he has placed reliance on a judgment in case of Natasha Singh versus Central Bureau of Investigation reported in (2013) 5 SCC 741 and has referred paragraph 15, which is quoted here-in-below:- "15. The scope and object of the provision is to enable the court to determine the truth and to render a just decision after discovering all relevant facts and obtaining proper proof of such facts, to arrive at a just decision of the case. Power must be exercised judiciously and not capriciously or arbitrarily, as any improper or capricious exercise of such power may lead to undesirable results. An application under Section 311 CrPC must not be allowed only to fill up a lacuna in the case of the prosecution, or of the defence, or to the disadvantage of the accused, or to cause serious prejudice to the defence of the accused, or to give an unfair advantage to the opposite party. Further, the additional evidence must not be received as a disguise for retrial, or to change the nature of the case against either of the parties. Such a power must be exercised, provided that the evidence that is likely to be tendered by a witness, is germane to the issue involved. An opportunity of rebuttal however, must be given to the other party. The power conferred under Section 311 CrPC must therefore, be invoked by the court only in order to meet the ends of justice, for strong and valid reasons, and the same must be exercised with great caution and circumspection. The very use of words such as "any court", "at any stage", or "or any enquiry, trial or other proceedings", "any person" and "any such person" clearly spells out that the provisions of this section have been expressed in the widest possible terms, and do not limit the discretion of the court in any way. There is thus no escape if the fresh evidence to be obtained is essential to the just decision of the case. The determinative factor should therefore be, whether the summoning/recalling of the said witness is in fact, essential to the just decision of the case." 4. Placing reliance on the above said judgment, he submits that it has specifically been held that while deciding an application under Section 311 of CrPC, the reason has to be assigned exhaustibly but in the instant matter, the same is missing. Therefore, the case of the present applicant is covered with the ratio of the judgment above said. Thus, submission is that the order impugned dated 26.06.2025 may set aside and the learned trial court may be directed to pass a fresh order. 5. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. appearing for the State has failed to dispute the aforesaid contention. 6. Considering the submission of learned counsel for the parties, particularly the order passed on application under Section 311 of CrPC of the applicant, on 26.06.2025 and the settled proposition of law in the case of Natasha Singh (supra), this Court finds merit in the application. Thus, the order dated 26.06.2025 is hereby set aside. 7. Matter is remitted back to the trial court concerned. 8. The applicant is given liberty to move fresh application under Section 311 of CrPC before the trial court within a period of seven days from the date of this order and if such an application is moved, learned trial court is directed to decide the same within a further period of thirty days after affording an opportunity of hearing to all concerned. 9. In view of aforesaid observations, the instant application is hereby allowed. Order Date :- 20.8.2025 Mohd. Sharif Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD SHARIF High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench