HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 6677 of 2025 Court No. - 91 HON'BLE ABDUL SHAHID, J. 1. Heard Sri Rahul Kumar Sharma, learned advocate holding the brief of Sri Suraj Pandey, learned counsel for the revisionist and learned AGA for the State. 2. The present criminal revision has been preferred by the revisionist- Rinku Alias Rajesh against the order dated 29.9.225 passed by the Special Judge (POCSO)-I, Hathras in Session Trial No.833 of 2023 (State vs.Rinku @ Rajesh) under Sections 376(3), 506, 342 IPC and Section 3/4 POCSO Act arising out of Case Crime No.0117 of 2023, Police Station- Sasni Kotwali, District-Hathras, whereby the application of the revisionist under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the revisionist has submitted that the revisionist had filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for the recalling the statements of all the three witnesses PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3. 4. The statement of the PW-1, namely, Ramesh has been recorded and cross-examination has been completed. The statement of the victim has also been recorded as PW-2 on 15.2.2024 and her cross-examination was also completed. The statement of Manju w/o Ramesh has also been recorded on 11.2.2025 and her cross-examination was also completed. 5. Thereafter, the accused persons including revisionist has filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for the recall of statements of all the witnesses without assigning any specific reasons or specific questions Versus Counsel for Revisionist(s) : Mohd. Razeen Ali, Suraj Pandey Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A., Ravi Pandey Rinku Alias Rajesh .....Revisionist(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) as to what had been left, which are necessary for proper adjudication of the trial of the case. 6. The learned trial court has passed impugned order dated 29.9.2025 that all the witnesses PW-1, PW-2 and PW-3 has duly been examined and their cross-examination has been completed. As per Section 311 Cr.P.C., the statement of the witnesses may be recorded, if their evidence is necessary for proper adjudication of the case, whereas no specific question has been mentioned by the revisionist-accused in his application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. 7. The present case is related with the rights of the victim and the case related to the Sections 376(3), 506, 342 IPC and Section 3/4 of the POCSO Act, 2012. 8. There is no illegality or irregularity in the impugned order, therefore, this revision is liable to be dismissed and is hereby dismissed. October 29, 2025 LN Tripathi CRLR No. 6677 of 2025 2 (Abdul Shahid,J.) Digitally signed by :- LALIT TRIPATHI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad