Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:113304 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22025 of 2025 Applicant :- Ram Chandar @ Chandar Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Alok Ashish Vaibhava,Avaneendra Kumar,Virendra Singh Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, Sri N.K. Upadhyay, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1 and perused the record. 2. The present application has been filed by the applicant praying for quashing impugned order dated 25.07.2024 passed by Special Judge (POCSO Act), Azamgarh in Special Case No.44 of 2022 (State vs. Ram Chandra), under section 376(2) (Cha), 506 IPC and Section 3/4 of POCSO Act, P.S. Kandharpur, District-Azamgarh arising out of Case Crime No.151 of 2021 by which application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. filed by the present applicant, has been rejected. 3. Initially, O.P. no.2 moved an application under section 156(3) Cr.P.C. on 26.05.2021 and subsequently, FIR was lodged on 09.11.2021 against the present applicant wherein allegation of commission of rape on informant's minor daughter was made. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was filed on 31.12.2021 and summons were issued and the trial commenced on 16.03.2022. During course of trial till date six witnesses have been examined. During trial, an application under section 311 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant for re-examination of victim, P.W.2, which has been rejected vide order dated 25.07.2024, which has been challenged by means of the instant application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the court below has rejected the application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. without going into the gravity of the matter. He further submitted that the witness PW.2 in her cross-examination has admitted that dispute is going on between her father and uncle (present applicant). He further submits that the application of the applicant has been mechanically rejected by the court below without properly appreciating the circumstances of the case and without following the provisions of law. The impugned order is perverse, erroneous and unsustainable in the eyes of law. 5. Per contra, learned A.G.A. vehemently opposed the application and contended that the applicant has filed the instant application by concealing material fact that his earlier application u/s 311 Cr.P.C., filed for re-examination of the same witness i.e. PW-2, was rejected by the court below and thereagainst he has approached this Court by preferring Application u/s 482 No.42949 of 2023, which was dismissed vide order dated 05.01.2024. He submitted that the entire exercise of filing application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been done by the applicant just to delay the trial of the case. He further submits that the Court below has rightly rejected the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order. 6. On being confronted with the fact that this application has been filed by concealing material facts, learned counsel for the applicant has no answer. 7. The aforesaid conduct of the learned counsel is highly deplorable and he is warned to not indulge into such practice in future. 8. So far as the impugned order is concerned, I see no illegality and I am of the view that the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been preferred by the applicant just to prolong the trial of the case. I find no merit in the instant application. 9. The instant application is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 15.7.2025 Manish Himwan Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad