IN THE HIGH COURT OF UTTARAKHAND AT NAINITAL Criminal Misc. Application No. 1218 of 2010 Sri Sohan Lal @ Sonu ………. Applicant/petitioner Versus State of Uttarakhand ..…. Respondent Present : Sri Pankaj Miglani, Advocate (Amicus Curiae ) present for the applicant. Sri S.S. Adhikari, A.G.A. present for the State/respondent. Dated : 21st December, 2010 Hon’ble Nirmal Yadav, J. Sri Pankaj Miglani, Advocate present for the applicant. Sri S.S. Adhikari, A.G.A. present for the State/respondent. Heard. This application under section 482 Cr.P.C. has been moved by applicant/accused challenging the order dated 19.10.2010 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge/1st FTC, Dehradun by which application under section 311 of Cr.P.C. for recalling the prosecutrix, has been rejected. According to the applicant, he could not put certain questions to the prosecutrix at the time of corss examining her. Now the application has been moved at the stage when examination all the witnesses is complete and the matter is at the stage of argument. Copies of the statement of prosecutirx have been placed by learned Amicus Curiae on record. 2 Perusal of the statement shows that prosecutrix is a minor girl, aged about 4-5 years. She categorically named the accused and described the act done against her by the accused. Taking into consideration the facts of the case, the application for recalling the prosecutrix at this belated stage i.e. stage of argument , can not be allowed. I do not find any merit in the application, accordingly, the same is dismissed. (Nirmal Yadav, J.) JKJ 21.12.2010