Neutral Citation No. - 2025:AHC:25698 Court No. - 71 Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 1189 of 2025 Applicant :- Pushpendra Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Syed Shahnawaz Shah Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.,Rishab Agrawal,Vinayak Mithal Hon'ble Rajeev Misra,J. 1. Heard Mr. Mohd. Nooruddin Khan, Advocate, holding brief of Mr. Syed Shahnawaz Shah, the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State and Mr. Rishab Agrawal, the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party-2. 2. Perused the record. 3. Applicant- Pushpendra who is a charge sheeted accused, has approached this Court by means of present application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with the following prayer:- "It is, therefore, most respectfully prayed that this Hon'ble Court may be pleased to quash the order dated 22.10.2024 passed by the Additional Session Judge, Court No.14, Meerut in Session Trial No.870 of 2021 U/s 302/34, 506 IPC arising out of Crime No.452 of 2021 P.S. Sardhana, District Meerut whereby the trial court dismissed the application moved by the defense side for bringing some relevant documents on record and to direct the court concerned to reconsider the application of the applicant and to permit the relevant documents to be placed on record so that just and fair trial take place against the applicant and others, pending in the Court of Additional Session Judge, Court No.14, Meerut. It is, further prayed that this Hon'ble Court may kindly be pleased to stay the effect and operation of the order dated 22.10.2024 passed by Additional Session Judge, Court No.14, Session Trial No.870 of 2021 U/s 302/34, 506 IPC arising out of Crime No.452 of 2021 P.S. Sardhana, District Meerut, pending in the court of Additional Session Judge, Court No.14, Meerut, so that justice be done, and/or pass such other and further order which this Hon'ble Court may deem fit and proper under the facts and circumstances of the case.." 4. At the very outset, the learned A.G.A. and Mr. Rishab Agrawal, the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party-2 have raised a preliminary objection by submitting that trial is at the stage of Section 242 Cr.P.C., i.e. prosecution evidence. Therefore, by reason of above, the application dated 10.10.2024 filed by accused to bring on record certain material as evidence was not maintainable. Referring to the three Judges Bench judgment of Supreme Court in State of Orissa Vs. Debendra Nath Padhi (2005) 1 SCC 568, it is thus urged by the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party-2 that proper course for the applicant was to wait till the stage of defence evidence i.e. Section 243 Cr.P.C. and to file the application before Court below in terms of Section 91 Cr.P.C. In view of above, no illegality or infirmity can be said to have been committed by Court below in rejecting aforementioned application. As such, no interference is warranted by this Court in present application. 5. When confronted with above, the learned counsel for applicant could not overcome the same. 6. Having heard the learned counsel for applicant, the learned A.G.A. for State, the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party-2 and upon perusal of record, this Court finds that the objections raised by the learned A.G.A. and the learned counsel representing first informant opposite party-2 in opposition to this application are not only borne out from the record but furthermore the same could not be dislodged by the learned counsel for applicant with reference to the record. In view of above, no good ground exists to entertain the present application. 7. As a result, the present application fails and is liable to be dismissed. 8 It is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 18.2.2025 Imtiyaz Digitally signed by :- IMTIYAZ AHMAD High Court of Judicature at Allahabad