Back
SWARANA KANTA SHARMA
Rajesh Jindal – Appellant
Versus
Sanjay Khurana – Respondent
JUDGMENT
Swarana Kanta Sharma, J.
1. The instant petition has been filed under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure Code (`Cr.P.C') by the petitioner seeking quashing/setting aside of order dated 06.02.2023 passed by learned Metropolitan Magistrate (NI Act), North-West District, Rohini Courts, Delhi in CC No. 14756 of 2016 in case tilted as `Sanjay Khurana vs. Sunil Jindal and others' for the offence punishable under Section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.
2. Briefly stated, the respondent had filed a complaint under Section 138 NI Act against Sunil Jindal, Rajesh Jindal and M/s Rex Apparels. Accordingly, the petitioner had preferred an application under Section 145 (2) Cr.P.C. which had been allowed by the Learned Trial Court for cross examination of the respondent, in which only three questions had been asked by the learned proxy counsel of the previous counsel for the respondent before closing the complainant's evidence. The petitioner had filed another application before the Learned Trial Court for further cross examination of complainant/respondent (CW-1). Accordingly, on 06.02.2023, an application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. had been filed by the petitioner
The duty of the court to summon and examine or recall and re-examine any person if their evidence appears to be essential to the just decision of the case under Section 311 Cr.P.C.
The power to recall witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, primarily to ensure justice, and not to remedy perceived inadequacies in prior legal representation.
Section 311 of Cr.PC. empowers Court to call any person as witness at any stage of inquiry, trial or other proceeding in order to reach to just decision of case.
The Court emphasized the broad powers under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to aid in the discovery of truth and ensure a just decision.
The power under Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. should be exercised sparingly and in the interest of justice, and the mere change of counsel is not a valid ground for the recall of a witness.
The main legal point established in the judgment is that the power of a trial Court under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. to allow re-examination of a witness for the purpose of conducting cross-examination o....
The right to cross-examine a complainant is essential for a fair trial, and its denial violates principles of natural justice and Article 21 of the Constitution.
An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers
Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance
Scan Me!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :
Back to top
