Back
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
SHALINDER KAUR
Medha Patkar – Appellant
Versus
V.K. Saxena – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
SHALINDER KAUR, J.
1. The present petition under Article 227 of the Constitution of India has been filed challenging the Order dated 18.03.2025 passed by the Judicial Magistrate First Class ('JMFC'), South East District, Saket Courts, New Delhi, in Complaint Case No. 633718/2016 titled ' Medha Patkar vs. V.K. Saxena '. By the said Order, the learned JMFC dismissed an application filed by the petitioner under Section 254(1) of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (“CrPC.”), seeking permission to examine an additional witness.
FACTUAL MATRIX
2. The complaint in the said case was instituted on 15.12.2000, alleging that an advertisement published on 10.11.2000 in the Indian Express newspaper was defamatory in nature. Thepetitioner/complainant named three accused persons, including the publisher and editor of the Indian Express newspaper, in addition to the respondent herein. The petitioner/complainant also filed a list of documents and proposed witnesses, including herself, the Circulation Manager (or his representative), Dr. Anoop Saraya, and such other persons.
3. As per the petitioner, cognizance of the complaint was taken by the learned Metropolitan Magistrate vide the Order
A complainant's right to introduce additional witnesses under Section 254(1) of the CrPC must be supported by timely requests and relevant justifications, particularly to ensure fair trial standards ....
The court held that the authority to summon material witnesses exists at any trial stage under Section 311 CrPC, emphasizing that introducing additional evidence is permissible when necessary for jus....
The discretionary power under Section 311 CrPC should be exercised judiciously and only if the evidence is essential to the just decision of the case.
The right to a speedy trial is integral to the right to free and fair trial under Article 21, impacted by delays and the non-availability of documentary evidence.
The accused has the right to present defense witnesses in a trial, and the trial court must issue summons unless there are valid grounds for refusal, ensuring that fair trial rights are upheld.
The right to a speedy trial is integral to Article 21 of the Constitution, and unreasonable delays due to prosecution can infringe this right, potentially warranting a quashing of proceedings.
The Trial Court has ample/wide power to summon any material witness or person for examination or re-examination in exercise of its power conferred upon it under Section 311 Cr.P.C. and this discretio....
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
