Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:110572 Court No. - 82 Case :- CRIMINAL REVISION No. - 180 of 2023 Revisionist :- Prembabu Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Revisionist :- Ram Chandra Solanki Counsel for Opposite Party :- Arun Kumar,G.A. Hon'ble Sameer Jain,J. 1. None appeared on behalf of the revisionist even in revised call. 2. Heard Shri Arun Kumar, learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and Shri R. N. Srivastava, learned A.G.A. for the State- respondent. 3. The instant criminal revision is pending since the year 2023 and from the order-sheet of the case, it reflects, earlier on two occasions also none was present on behalf of the revisionist, therefore, instant revision is going to be disposed of finally. 4. The instant criminal revision has been filed by the revisionist to set aside the impugned order dated 03.01.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Etawah in S.T. No.23 of 2013 (State vs. Raju and others) arising out of Case Crime No.54 of 2011, under Sections 148, 302/149, 307/149, 452 I.P.C. and Section 7 Criminal Law Amendment Act, Police Station Balrai, District Etawah and with further prayer to stay the further proceeding and effect and operation of the aforesaid impugned order dated 03.01.2023. 5. From the record, it reflects, by way of the instant revision, revisionist challenge the impugned order dated 03.01.2023 passed by the trial court by which his application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling of P.W.-10 and P.W.-11 was dismissed. 6. Learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 submit that there is no illegality in the impugned order dated 03.01.2023. 7. They further submit that revisionist was one of the accused and instant matter relates to the offence under Section 302 I.P.C. and he moved an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall the P.W.- 10 and P.W.-11 only with intention to delay the trial and therefore, by rejecting his application, court concerned did not commit any illegality and therefore, instant revision is devoid of merit and it should be dismissed. 8. I have heard learned A.G.A. as well as learned counsel for the opposite party no.2 and perused the material available on record. 9. From the record, it reflects, revisionist filed an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall the P.W.-10 and P.W.-11 on the ground that their statements are contrary to each other and therefore, it is necessary to recall them. In considered view of this Court, the ground taken by the revisionist in recall application was not sufficient to recall P.W.-10 and P.W.-11 and therefore trial court rightly dismissed his application vide impugned order dated 03.01.2023. 10. This Court do not find any illegality in the impugned order dated 03.01.2023, therefore, considering the facts and circumstances of the case discussed above, in my view, instant revision filed by the revisionist is devoid of merit and is accordingly dismissed. Order Date :- 10.7.2025 Zafar Digitally signed by :- MOHAMMAD ZAFAR ANSARI High Court of Judicature at Allahabad