HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD APPLICATION U/S 528 BNSS No. - 35934 of 2025 Court No. - 77 HON'BLE SAURABH SRIVASTAVA, 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 BNSS has been preferred to quash the order dated 12.08.2025 passed in S.T. No.1217 of 2024 (State of U.P. vs. Shubham) arising out of Case Crime No.222 of 2024, under sections 363, 366 IPC and sections 16/17 POCSO Act, P.S. Atrauli, District- Aligarh, pending in the court of learned POCSO-II, Aligarh, through the application dated 12.08.2025 preferred under section 348 BNSS/311 Cr.P.C. has been rejected. 3. Learned counsel for the applicant submitted that the impugned order has been passed by learned court concerned is illegal and against the material on record, since during trial prosecution witnesses has been examined in absence of accused/applicant's counsel and as such the order passed by learned court concerned may be liable to be quashed by this Court. 4. Per contra, learned A.G.A. for the State vehemently opposed the prayer as made in the application and rebutted the stand taken up by learned counsel for applicant by way of submitting that no plausible reasons have been described while entertaining the application under section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling the prosecution witnesses and it is apparent from the record that once the opportunity of cross-examining the prosecution witnesses has already been given which has not been utilized, then there is no other option left to accept the application preferred at the behest of applicant only on the basis that the counsel for defence has been changed after gap of certain Versus Counsel for Applicant(s) : Shailendra Ratan Bhushan Counsel for Opposite Party(s) : G.A. Shubham .....Applicant(s) State Of U.P. And 3 Others .....Opposite Party(s) period of time and as such subsequent counsel will take some more time for cross-examining the prosecution witnesses again. 5. After hearing rival submissions extended by learned counsel for the parties and by bare perusal of record, this Court finds that the reasoning recorded by learned trial court while rejecting the application preferred at the behest of applicant is quite justified and as such no interference is required by this Court to entertain this application. 6. In view thereof, the instant application under section 528 BNSS lacks merit and is hereby dismissed. September 18, 2025 Saif NA528 No. 35934 of 2025 2 (Saurabh Srivastava,J.) Digitally signed by :- SHAIKH SAIF ABDIN High Court of Judicature at Allahabad