SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

1995 Supreme(Guj) 422

K.J.VAIDYA, M.H.KADRI
VISHAL RAJENDRA TRIVEDI – Appellant
Versus
STATE – Respondent


Advocates Appeared: F.B.BRAHMBHATT, K.J.SETHNA, S.R.DIVETIA

K. J. VAIDYA, J.

( 1 ) ). The question of indeed, quite great importance that arises for consideration in this appeal is - "whether the prosecution witness who having once been examined through and through before the trial Court, and quite relying upon his evidence and also alongwith that of others, if the trial Court has reached the conclusion that the prosecution has proved its case beyond doubt, much less the reasonable doubt to hold accused guilty for the alleged offence punishable under sec. 302 of I. P. Code sentencing him to life, then whether under such undisputable circumstances it would be just, legal and proper for this Court to recall and examine the very same witness as Court witness and/or at the instance and on an application of the appellant-accused under Secs. 311 and 391 of the Cri. P. Code 1973, made by the convict-prisoner because as submitted the same was likely to change the very nature and complexion of the offence alleged against him and ultimately thereby modify and alter the quantum of sentence that may be passed against him ?" The background and context in which this question arises is set out as under :

( 2 ) ). To briefly narrate, the prosecution case as














Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top