Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:118880 Court No. - 79 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 22739 of 2025 Applicant :- Ram Charan Alias Bindi And 5 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Atul Kumar,Surjeet Singh Chahar Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Vinay Kumar Tripathi Hon'ble Prashant Kumar,J. 1. Heard Sri Atul Kumar, learned counsel for the applicants, Sri S.D. Pandey, learned A.G.A. for the State-O.P. no.1, Sri V.K. Tripathi, learned counsel for O.P. no.2 and perused the record. 2. The present application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed by the applicants praying for quashing impugned order dated 12.06.2025 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Court No.1, Mathura in Sessions Trial No.1849 of 2023 (State v. Ravindra and others) arising out of Case Crime no.122 of 2023, under section 147, 148, 302/34, 120-B IPC, P.S. Shergarh, District-Mathura and direct the trial court to complete the cross-examination with PW1 in the aforesaid case. 3. The facts of the case are that O.P. no.2 has lodged an FIR against 14 named accused including the present applicants on 30.04.2023 under section 147, 148, 302/34, 120-B IPC with an allegation that the accused persons has assaulted his uncle causing severe injuries to him and while he was being taken to hospital for treatment, he died in the way. After completion of investigation, chargesheet was submitted on 09.07.2023 against six accused persons, who are the present applicants, and rest of the accused were exonerated. Thereafter, cognizance was taken and as the offences were exclusively triable by Sessions Court, the case was committed to the Sessions Court on 01.12.2023 and the trial commenced. During course of trial statement of P.W.1 was recorded and thereafter cross-examination was also done. However, in the order sheet dated 29.07.2024 it was mentioned that date 28.08.2024 is being fixed for cross-examination of PW.1. In the meantime, wife of deceased moved an application seeking permission for doing pairvi in the case as she has suspicion that the informant (PW1), who happens to be her nephew, was in collusion with the accused persons. Her application was allowed vide order dated 23.05.2025. Thereafter, the applicants have moved an application for completing cross-examination of PW.1, which has been rejected by the court below vide order dated 12.06.2025. The said order has been challenged by means of the instant application. 4. Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that PW 1 is the informant and witness of fact in the instant case and his complete cross-examination is necessary for just and fair decision of the case. He next submitted that certain questions regarding site plan, incident and inquest report are to be put to the witness, which is very essential to arrive at just decision of the case. He submitted that the impugned order passed by the court below is totally illegal and arbitrary. He further submitted that a last opportunity may be given to the applicants to cross-examine PW 1. 5. Per contra, learned counsel for O.P. no.2 vehemently opposed the application and contended that there is no illegality in the impugned order. He submitted that the court below in the impugned order has specifically recorded a finding that though in the order sheet dated 29.07.2024 it was mentioned that the case was fixed for cross-examination of PW1 but the defence counsel did not ask for his cross- examination on any of the next dates fixed in the matter i.e. 28.08.2024, 19.09.2024, 17.10.2024 and several other dates, even though PW 1 was appearing before the court on each and every date. He further submitted that the court below even recorded that this conduct of defence counsel goes to show that cross- examination of PW 1 was complete. At last, he submitted that the Court below has rightly rejected the application of the applicants seeking further cross-examination of P.W.1 and no interference is required by this Court in the impugned order. However, after detailed argument, he stated that he has no objection in case the instant application is allowed and one last opportunity to cross-examine the witness is given to the defence side. 6. On the other hand, learned A.G.A. has adopted the same argument as advanced by learned counsel for O.P. no.2 and submitted that the impugned order suffers from no illegality or infirmity warranting interference by this Court. 7. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused the record. 8. Considering the rival submissions advanced on behalf of the parties and keeping in mind the fact that the instant matter involves offence under section 302 IPC, I am of the view that one last opportunity can be given to the applicants to cross- examine PW1. 9. Accordingly, the instant application is disposed of with a direction to the concerned trial court to fix some date for cross-examination of PW 1, with the consent of both the sides, and the cross-examination shall be completed on the date so fixed. Order Date :- 22.7.2025 Manish Himwan Digitally signed by :- MANISH HIMWAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad