Lokendra vs State Of U.P. And Another
- Neutral2026:AHC:104122
Ratio decidendi
The rule this decision rests on
An application under Section 528 BNSS to quash an order rejecting an application for additional evidence, filed after arguments have concluded and the case has been fixed for judgment, lacks merit where the proposed evidence is inadmissible and the applicant has already adduced evidence in defence; the rejection of such a belated application by the trial court involves no illegality, irregularity, or jurisdictional error and does not warrant interference by the appellate court.
Written by Miss Lucy from the judgment below, not taken from a headnote.
Judgment
As delivered
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and learned AGA for the State
2. Present application under Section 528 of the BNSS has been filed to quash the impugned order dated 16.03.2026 passed by the Session Judge, Baghpat in Session Case No.734/2022 (State Vs. Lokendra and others) bearing Case Crime No. 230 of 2022, u/s 302 and 34 I.P.C, Police Station Baraut, District Baghpat, pending in the court of Session Judge, Baghpat.
3. An application dated 16.03.2026 was moved by the applicant/ accused when the judgment was to be pronounced by the learned trial court.
4. It was argued by the learned counsel for the applicant that the applicant wanted to place a newspaper dated 28.03.2022 on the record of the learned trial court, but his prayer was wrongly rejected by the learned trial court vide order dated 16.03.2026.
5. Learned A.G.A. opposed the prayer and submitted that the newspaper item is not admissible in evidence and that the application dated 16.03.2026 was misconceived and was filed by the applicant only to linger on the trial. The application dated 16.03.2026 was rightly rejected by the learned trial court vide order dated 16.03.2026.
6. I have heard rival submissions of the parties and perused the record.
7. The newspaper item is not admissible in evidence, and the applicant had already adduced evidence in his defence. Once the arguments were over and the case was fixed for judgment, the present application dated 16.03.2026 was moved by the applicant before the learned trial court, which was rightly rejected by the learned trial court vide order dated 16.03.2026. There is no illegality, irregularity, or jurisdictional error in the impugned order dated 16.03.2026.
8. The present application under Section 528 BNSS lacks merit and deserves to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed.
9. The Registrar (Compliance) is directed to send a copy of this order to the learned trial court/Sessions Judge, Baghpat by the fastest available mode.
(Vivek Kumar Singh,J.)
May 6, 2026
Radhika
This page reproduces a public judgment and a summary of it. It is research material, not legal advice, and it is no substitute for advice from an advocate on your own facts.
Research this judgment with Miss Lucy
Ask what it holds, what has followed it, and what it means for your matter — in plain English, with the citations.
Try Miss Lucy free