Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:116993 Court No. - 70 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 25164 of 2025 Applicant :- Mujeeb Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. And 3 Others Counsel for Applicant :- Awadhesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Dr. Gautam Chowdhary,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant, learned A.G.A. for the State and perused the record. 2. The instant application under Section 528 B.N.S.S. has been filed challenging the order dated 09.06.2025 passed by learned Additional District and Sessions Judge/ Special Judge (POCSO Act), Court No. 3, Ghaziabad in Special Criminal Case No. 51 of 2024 (State Vs. Mujeeb and others), arising out of Case Crime No. 02 of 2024, under Sections 376(D), 323 I.P.C. and Section 5g/6 of Protection of Children From Sexual Offences Act, Police Station Masoori, District Ghaziabad, whereby the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for summoning the prosecution witness-P.W.1 for further cross examination has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the application No. 28-Kha under Section 311 Cr.P.C. was moved on behalf of the applicant with the prayer that in the F.I.R. as well as in her statements recorded under Section 161 & 164 Cr.P.C. the victim has made specific allegations against the co-accused but before the trial court she had denied the same and has made specific allegations against the applicant. Though the previous counsel of the applicant has cross-examined the victim on behalf of applicant, mistakenly he has not cross-examined the victim regarding contradictions and omissions appearing in her evidence, now the applicant has engaged new counsel, therefore, one opportunity be given to new counsel of the applicant by recalling the victim for cross-examining her again, but the learned Sessions Judge has rejected the said application without application of mind in cursory manner. 4. Per contra, the learned A.G.A. for the State submits that the application moved on behalf of the applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. before the trial court was nothing but the same was filed for the purpose to delay the trial. The counsel for the applicant was given adequate opportunity to cross-examine the victim and he had already cross-examined her Thus, the trial court has rightly rejected the said application filed by the applicant by the impugned order. There is no merit in the case and the present revision may be dismissed. 5. I have considered the rival submissions advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. I have also perused the material available on record and also gone through the impugned order dated 09.06.2025 passed by the trial court. In the impugned order it has been observed that earlier adequate opportunity was given to the counsel for the accused to cross examine the victim and he had already availed the same and now after engaging another counsel the present application has been moved with the prayer to recall the victim to cross-examine her again, is nothing but an abuse of process of law and it appears that revisionist wants to linger on the trial anyhow. Thus, there is no illegality or infirmity in the impugned order and the same has rightly been passed by the trial court after considering the entire facts and circumstances of the case. There is no merit in the present application and the same is liable to be dismissed. 6. Dismissed accordingly. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Mustaqeem. Digitally signed by :- MOHD MUSTAQEEM KHAN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad