Neutral Citation No.- 2025:AHC:33292 Court No. - 52 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 7612 of 2025 Applicant :- Smt. Shiv Devi Opposite Party :- State of U.P. Counsel for Applicant :- Mani Shankar,Sitaram Patel Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Mrs. Manju Rani Chauhan,J. 1. Heard Mr. Mani Shankar, learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the material on record. 2. The instant application has been filed assailing the orders dated 14.05.2024 and 22.05.2024 vide which opportunity of cross examination of PW-1 has been closed and recall application of the aforesaid order has also been rejected respectively. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that 13.05.2024 was the date fixed for examination of PW-1 and on the said date statement of PW-1 was recorded and he was cross-examined by one advocate namely Brij Bhan Yadav appearing on behalf of the applicant. As the cross-examination was continued on 14.05.2024, therefore, on the said date an application was moved by the applicant for fixing another date for cross-examination of PW-1 as Senior Counsel Mr. Jagdish Narayan Sharma was out of town and also required time to read the statement of PW-1 for further cross-examination of PW-1. He further submits that the aforesaid application has been rejected in a mechanical manner without application of judicial mind, therefore, recall application for recalling the aforesaid order was moved by the applicant which has also been rejected by order dated 22.05.2024, which is illegal and improper. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the application moved on 14.05.2024 has been rejected on the ground that PW-1 is an old person and has come from distant district for his cross-examination, therefore, it would not be proper to postpone the cross-examination of PW-1 and the opportunity of cross-examination of PW-1 was closed. The reason as given by the concerned Court while closing the opportunity of cross-examination of PW-1 is incorrect as PW-1 is resident of Sumerpur and not of any other district. He resides only 14 to 15 kilometers from Head Quarter (Mukhyalaya). No reason has been assigned for not postponing the date on the request of the applicant that the lawyer who has to cross-examine the PW-1 is out of town and is not available. He further submits that recall application has also been rejected in mechanical manner without realizing the aforesaid fact that for proper adjudication of the matter opportunity of cross-examination of PW-1 should have been given to the applicant. 5. Learned A.G.A. on the other hand submits that there is no illegality, infirmity in the orders dated 14.05.2024 and 22.05.2024 as the trial is pending since 2019 wherein charges were framed on 02.01.2020. 6. He further submits that after the framing of charges repeated summons have been issued and after several efforts PW-1 Prem Kumar has appeared before the Court for recording his statement. Mr. Brijbhan Yadav, Advocate, on behalf of accused Vishwanath, Rakesh, Smt. Bhullan and Smt. Ramshree, has appeared and PW-1 has been cross- examined by him on 13.05.2024. As the cross-examination was not completed on the said date, therefore, next date 14.05.2024 was fixed and on that date cross-examination was completed. He further submits that opportunity for cross-examination was provided to the counsel for applicant but he moved an application for adjournment without cross- examination of PW-1. He further submits that if there was any inconvenience, the aforesaid request should have been raised on the said date i.e. 13.05.2024 as the date fixed for cross-examination of PW- 1 was on the next date i.e. 14.05.2025 which was well within the knowledge of the accused persons as well as their lawyers who are representing their case and cross had already been started by them. Therefore, opportunity of cross-examination of PW-1 was closed on 14.05.2024, there being no illegality done by the Court concerned. 7. After closing the opportunity of cross-examination of PW-1 opportunity was given for cross-examination of other alleged accused persons to Smt. Shiv Devi. When no cross was done by the lawyer of the applicant opportunity of cross-examination of PW-1 was closed and the request for postponing the date was also rejected. 8. It has also been very relevantly pointed out by the Court concerned that the witness had appeared after 2020 before the Court. The other accused persons have also completed their cross- examination, however, the applicant did not cross-examine the aforestated witness which is only for the purpose of delaying the trial. The intention of the applicant was only to harass the old person by calling him on several dates. 9. On the date of passing the order on recall application dated 22.05.2024, PW-2 was present for recording the statement and cross- examination. In such circumstances, giving opportunity to the applicant for re-examination of PW-1 is not justified in view of the settled position of law. 10. The intention of the applicant making permission for cross- examination of PW-1 is very clear as the matter relates to Section 304- B IPC which is an offence of the serious nature whereas the charges have been framed under Section 306 I.P.C. Learned A.G.A. further submits that the Apex Court on several occasions have taken a view that cases related to offence against women should be decided at the earliest. 11. Having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case and having considered the submissions made by the learned counsel for the parties as well as material available on record prima-facie, the concerned court below has not committed any illegality in rejecting the application as well as recall of the applicant. There is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned orders dated 14.05.2024 and 22.05.2024 passed by the concerned court below. Therefore, no interference is required at this stage. 12. In view of the above, the application is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 7.3.2025 Rahul. Digitally signed by :- RAHUL GOSWAMI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad