Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:117726 Court No. - 77 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 24281 of 2025 Applicant :- Parmatma Agrahari Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Akhilesh Kumar Mishra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A. Hon'ble Saurabh Srivastava,J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the parties. 2. Present application has been preferred with prayer to quash order dated 26.05.2025 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, FTC II, Basti in S.T. no. 154 of 2022 (State vs. Parmatma Agrahari and others) under Section 8/20/27 NDPS in Case Crime no. 215 of 2021, PS- Kalwari, District Basti by means of which the court below has rejected the application filed on behalf of applicant to recall PW1 and PW5 and the trial court be directed to decide the application dated 09.12.2024 afresh. 3. Learned counsel for applicant submitted that during trial of aforesaid Session Trial no. 154 of 2022 arising out of Case Crime no. 215 of 2021, PW1 namely Arvind Kumar Shahi and PW5 namely Ravindra Nath Yadav were already cross-examined but on certain issues some question could not be put up and as such applicant moved application u/s 311 Cr.P.C. dated 09.12.2024 before learned court concerned to recall PW1 and PW5 but the same has been rejected vide order dated 26.05.2025 which has been challenged through instant application. 4. It is contended by learned counsel for applicant that order dated 26.05.2025 passed by learned trial court is misconceived and court concerned without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case as well the necessity for summoning the PW1 and PW5, has rejected the application filed on behalf of applicant. It is next submitted that counsel for defence/applicant was not engaged at the time of cross-examination of PW1 and PW5, hence he should be given opportunity to re-examine PW1 and PW5. 5. Per contra, learned AGA vehemently opposed the prayer sought through instant application. 6. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsels for the parties and perusing the records this Court observed that application preferred at the behest of applicant under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been decided by learned court concerned by way of specifically questioning the learned counsel for defence appearing before learned court concerned that at the time of cross- examination why the intended question has not been put before Prosecution Witness, in reply, it is apparent from the order which impugned the present application that learned counsel for defence submitted that he was not counsel at that time. 7. 7. The grounds has also been taken up by learned counsel for the applicant at this stage, that the oral question which has been asked by learned court before learned counsel for defence cannot be taken as a ground that he was not counsel for defence at that time when the cross-examination has been conducted before learned trial court but from perusal of records, it is observed that the stage of cross-examination has already been gone before and the same was conducted on 10.05.2022 and after gap of near about more than 3 years the recall of the witnesses is nothing but the dilatory tactics adopted by the applicant and the same cannot be permitted at this stage. 8. The application u/s 528 BNSS stands dismissed accordingly. Order Date :- 18.7.2025 Shaswat Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad Digitally signed by :- SHASWAT SINGH High Court of Judicature at Allahabad