Courts must assess the necessity of additional witnesses for just adjudication without solely relying on time constraints, prioritizing fairness over procedural deadlines.

ORDER :

1. Crl.R.P.No.1178/2025 has been filed challenging order dated 21.10.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.262/2025 in C.C.No.05/2012 pending before the Special Court,(CBI)-I, Ernakulam.

2. Order dated 21.10.2025 in Crl.M.P.No.263/2025 in C.C.No.06/2012 on the files of the Special Court, (CBI)-I, Ernakulam, is under challenge in Crl.R.P.No.1180/2025.

3. Heard the learned Special Public Prosecutor appearing for the revision petitioner - CBI as well as the respondents in both these cases.

4. Precisely telling, the orders impugned were passed by the learned Special Judge when the CBI filed separate petitions in the above cases under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (for short 'the Cr.P.C.' hereinafter) to re-open the evidence and to examine additional witnesses viz., 1) Sri.K.P.Peter, 2) Sri.P.K.Kunhan 3) Sri.Hari and 4) Sri.Noushad, to prove certain points. According to the learned Special Public Prosecutor, the examination of Sri K.P.Peter is necessary to prove the collection of specimen signatures of the 2^nd accused for the purpose of obtaining expert opinion. Similarly, the examination of Sri P.K. Kunhan is necessary to identify the signatures of the 2^nd accused, which were also collected for obtaining expert opinion after comparing the documents seized with his handwriting and admitted signatures. Similarly, Sri.Hari, the Manager, and Sri.Noushad, the Salesman of M/s.Titan One, Makkah Tower, Manjeri, are also required to be examined to prove that two Titan watches were accepted by the 2^nd accused as illegal gratification from the 4^th accused, and that the same were purchased by accused Nos. 3 and 4.

5. The learned Special Public Prosecutor read out the reasons pointed out by the learned Special Judge for dismissing the petitions, as stated in paragraph Nos.9 to 12 and contended that the reasons stated by the learned Special Judge with immense experience are not at all justifiable and therefore, the irrational and illegal orders would not sustain in the eye of law. The reasons stated in paragraph Nos. 9 to 12 are reproduced as under:

“9. This petition is filed to summon additional witnesses shown in the list submitted along with the petition. The case is of the year 2012. The Hon'ble High Court as per order dated 19.08.2025 in Cil.R.P. No.18/2022 has directed this court to expedite the trial and finish the same at the earliest, at any rate within a period of 3 months from the date of receipt of copy of the order. The copy of the order was received in this court on 09.09.2025.

So, the time limit expires by 09.12.2025. 10. On getting the direction from the Hon'ble High Court, this court heard both sides and charge was framed on 15.09.2025 and the case was posted for scheduling the case for trial to 23.09.2025. On that day, after hearing both sides, the case was scheduled for examination of witnesses from 14.10.2025 to 17.10.2025. So far, PW1 to 12 examined and Ext.P1 to 45 marked. As per the present schedule, 10 more witnesses are to be examined in this case. Examination of that witnesses is proposed to be scheduled from 11.11.2025 to 14.11.2025.

11. This court is engaged in trial of SC 2/2021 (Edakkara Maoist case) in which 15 accused are in remand and the first 10 days of every month is set-apart to that case. The trial of SC 1/2020 (Pantheerankavu Maoist case) wherein in 2 accused are in remand for long time is also in progress and 144 witnesses are examined on the side of the prosecution. 10 days are to be set apart to that case every month. Trial of 7 other cases of the CBI are also in progress and time to be allotted to that cases also every month. So, the t