1 NAFR HIGH COURT OF CHHATTISGARH AT BILASPUR CRMP No. 2320 of 2025 Rakesh Kurre @ Hasan S/o Jainarayan Kurre Aged About 27 Years R/o Village Khola, Near Hanuman Mandir, PS Abhanpur, Raipur, Distt- Raipur C.G. ... Petitioner(s) versus State Of Chhattisgarh Through The Collector, Distt- Raipur C.G. ... Respondent(s) For Petitioner : Mr. N. Naha Roy, Advocate For Respondent : Ms. Pragya Shrivastava, Dy. Govt. Adv. Hon'ble Shri Justice Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal Order On Board 24/07/2025 1. The present petition under Section 528 of BNSS, 2023 has been filed against the order dated 26.06.2025 passed by learned 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur in Session Trial No.165/2023 whereby the application under Section 311 of CrPC preferred by the petitioner for recalling of prosecution witnesses PW-5 & PW-14 for further cross- examination has been rejected. Digitally signed by BHOLA NATH KHATAI Date: 2025.07.25 11:34:28 +0530 2 2. The petitioner is facing criminal proceeding under Sections 302, 201, 120B & 34 of IPC before the 8th Additional Sessions Judge, Raipur in Session Trial No.165/2023. The prosecution witnesses Deepak Agrawal (PW-5) and Dharmendra Patkar (PW-14) have already been examined before the trial Court. After completion of evidence of PW-5 & PW-14, the petitioner/accused moved an application under Section 311 of CrPC for recalling them for cross- examination again on the ground that necessary questions were not asked by the former counsel. Learned trial Court, vide impugned order rejected the said application of the petitioner, leading to the filing of this petition. 3. It is the argument of learned counsel for the petitioner that some important questions have been left out and hence it is necessary to cross-examine PW-5 & PW-14 again. He submits that the order in question is not proper in the eyes of law, hence, it should be set aside. 4. Perusal of the impugned order reflects that the evidence of PW-5 Deepak Agrawal was recorded on 24.11.2023 and PW-14 Dharmendra Patkar was recorded on 05.10.2024. On both the said dates, defence counsel on behalf of the accused/petitioner was present and both the witnesses were cross-examined in detail by him. The application under Section 311 CrPC was filed by the petitioner/accused on the ground of change of advocate wherein it was found that certain questions were left out in the cross-examination done by the former advocate. The trial Court vide impugned order rejected the said application holding that the trial is in its final stage, the accused has been given sufficient opportunity to cross- examine PW-5 & PW-14 and it is not justified to call the 3 said witnesses for cross-examination again on the ground of change of counsel. 5. As such, this Court does not find any illegality or infirmity in the impugned order warranting any interference by this Court. 6. Thus, the present CRMP is dismissed at the motion stage. Sd/- Sd/- (Sanjay Kumar Jaiswal) Judge Khatai