Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:42993 Court No. - 70 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 9372 of 2025 Applicant :- Yashovardhan Singh And Another Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Abhishek Tripathi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. Heard Mr. Abhishek Tripathi, the learned counsel for applicants, the learned A.G.A. for State/opposite party-1 and Mr. Arun Kumar Singh, the learned counsel who has put in appearance on behalf of first informant/oppsoite party-2 by filing his vakalatnama today in Court which is taken on record. Perused the record. Applicants are charge sheeted accused and facing trial before Court below have approached this Court by means of present application under section 528 BNSS with the following prayer: "It is, therefore, Most Respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to allow the present application and quash the impugned order dated 05.03.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Kanpur Dehat in Session Trial No. 99 of 2010 (State Vs. Yashovardhan and others), arising out of Case Crime No.301 of 2007, u/s 302, 307, 120-B I.P.C, Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar, whereby learned trial court rejected the adjournment application moved by the applicants and closed the examination of remaining defence witnesses mentioned at sl. no. 3, 4, 6 and 7 in the list of defence witnesses filed by the applicants in application 319Kha, and the learned trial court may kindly be directed to examine above mentioned remaining defence witnesses during trial. It is further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay all the further proceedings of Session Trial No.99 of 2010 (State Vs. Yashovardhan and others), arising out of Case Crime No.301 of 2007, u/s 302, 307, 120-B I.P.C, Police Station Ghatampur, District Kanpur Nagar, pending in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.6, Kanpur Dehat, during the pendency of present Criminal Misc. Application before this Hon'ble Court. And/or to pass such other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case." At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. representing State/opposite party-1 submits that from the perusal of order impugned it is apparent that undertaking was given by applicant's counsel before Court below that after completion of Maha Kumbh the witness shall be produced before Court below. Inspite of the said undertaking having been given before Court below, the witnesses were not produced before Court below.In view of above, the Court below has passed the order impugned whereby the stay application filed by accused applicants befoe Court below was rejected and the matter was fixed for final hearing. It is further contended that since court below has not closed the right of accused applicant to adduce the witness therefore no prejudice can be said to be caused to the accused applicants. It is thus urged by the learned A.G.A. that no interference is warranted by this Court in present application. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant has made a half hearted attempt to dislodge the order impugned. However, no specific pleadings have been raised in the affidavit filed in support of present application to the effect that the recital occurring in penultimate part of paragraph 4 of the order impugned is factually incorrect. Applicants cannot play hot and cold at the same time. As such, o good ground exists to entertain the present application. In view of above, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 24.3.2025 Arshad Digitally signed by :- ARSHAD MAHMOOD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad