HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT ALLAHABAD MATTERS UNDER ARTICLE 227 No. - 10828 of 2026 Court No. - 55 HON'BLE VIKRAM D. CHAUHAN, J. 1. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner, Sri Anil Srivastava, learned Senior Counsel assisted by Sri Ram Bahadur, learned counsel for respondent no. 1 and learned A.G.A. for the State. 2. The petition is filed with the following prayer:- "(1). Issue an order or direction to call for the records and **quash/set aside** the Impugned Revisional Judgment & Order dated 24.06.2026 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge / Special Judge (EC Act), Jhansi in Criminal Revision No. 86 of 2025, as well as the Order dated 13.02.2025 passed by the Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, Court No. 1, Jhansi in Complaint Case No. 1245/2016 (New No. 2536/2024). (Annexure no.7 and 9 of this petition)." 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused submits that complaint and affidavit of examination-in-chief were filed. However, for cross examination, the complainant was not appearing before the court concerned and as such by order dated 17.3.2023 the complainant evidence was closed. Subsequently on 5.4.2023 statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. of petitioner-accused was recorded and recall application was filed by respondent no. 1-complainant and the same was allowed by order dated 13.2.2025 on payment of cost of Rs. 1500/- against which revision was filed and revision has been rejected. Learned counsel for the petitioner-accused further submits that after recording of the statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. of the petitioner-accused, the recall application Versus Counsel for Petitioner(s) : Harish Chandra Mishra Counsel for Respondent(s) : Prem Narayan Singh, Ram Bahadur, G.A. Akhiesh Kumar Chaubey .....Petitioner(s) Dr. Narendra Kumar Jain And Another .....Respondent(s) was allowed which would prejudice the petitioner. 4. At this stage, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of respondent no. 1-complainant submits that incorrect date was noted by the complainant and as a result of the same the complainant could not appear and on 17.3.2023 order was passed. Learned Senior Counsel appearing for respondent no. 1-complainant further submits that examination-in- chief is submitted along with the affidavit and it is for the petitioner- accused to cross examine. Therefore, the trial court has committed no error in opening of the evidence of the petitioner-accused and respondent no. 1-complainant as the same was to provide an opportunity to the accused to cross examine the complainant. 5. On a query being made to learned counsel for the petitioner-accused that whether he would cross examine the complainant and its witnesses, learned counsel for the petitioner-accused submits that petitioner-accused is ready to cross examine the complainant and the complainant witnesses. 6. In view of the aforesaid, this Court is of the view that a fair opportunity should be granted to the petitioner-accused to cross examine the complainant and its witnesses. Therefore, one opportunity is granted to the petitioner-accused to cross examine the complainant and their witnesses. The aforesaid opportunity may be availed within a period of two months from today for appearance of the complainant and his witnesses. If the complainant and his witnesses are cross examined, then petitioner-accused would have further opportunity for recording statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. and leading evidence, leaving it open for the court concerned to proceed with the matter. 7. With the aforesaid observation/direction, the petition is disposed of. September 28, 2026 VMA A227 No. 10828 of 2026 2 (Vikram D. Chauhan,J.) Digitally signed by :- VISHWA MOHAN ARORA High Court of Judicature at Allahabad