Research › Search › Judgment

Allahabad High Court · body

2025 DAILYLAW 69115 (ALL)

PRADEEP v. STATE OF U.P. AND ANOTHER

NA528/22644/2025 · 2025-07-30

Krishna Swaroop Dhar Dwivedi Senior Registrar J Conf

body2025

Judgment text

Extracted from the PDF above. The PDF is authoritative.

Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:128122 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22644 of 2025 Applicant :- Pradeep Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Javed Khan,Subuhi Naseem Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Sandeep Jain,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The present application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 03.10.2023 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Room No. 6, District - Moradabad in Sessions Trial No. 2076 of 2022, arising out of Case Crime No. 456 of 2022, under Section-302/120-B I.P.C., Police Station- Majhola, District-Moradabad. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that in the case diary it has been recorded that during investigation a C.C.T.V. footage was obtained and its C.D. was enclosed with the case diary but when applicant requested that evidence be provided to him, the trial court refused his prayer. Learned counsel further submits that since the required evidence is available in the case diary, as such, it should have been provided to the applicant-accused. 4. Learned A.G.A. submitted that no such evidence is available with the prosecution and as such, it could not be provided to the accused. 5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case and from the perusal of the impugned order, it is evident that the Investigating Officer had not filed any such electronic evidence after investigation and as such it was not provided to the accused. If any such electronic evidence is produced during trial by the prosecution then certainly the accused will get an opportunity to see that evidence and obtain a copy of that evidence and further to cross-examine the prosecution witness. 6. Considering the facts and circumstances of the present case, I am of the opinion that no illegality has been committed by the trial court in passing the impugned order dated 03.10.2023. 7. Accordingly, the present application under Section 528 of B.N.S.S. is rejected. Order Date :- 31.7.2025 Jitendra Digitally signed by :- JITENDRA KUMAR PATEL High Court of Judicature at Allahabad