Back
MANOJ KUMAR GARG
Rajkumar – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through PP – Respondent
ORDER
1. The present criminal misc. Petition under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure has been filed by the petitioner Rajkumar against the order dated 06.09.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge, No.3, Chittorgarh by which the revision petition filed by the petitioner has been dismissed and upheld the order dated 25.02.2020 passed by Additional Judicial Magistrate, Chittorgarh rejecting the application filed by the accused petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C.for re-examination.
2. Brief facts of the case are that the respondent complainant filed a complaint under Section 138 N.I. Act stating therein that the petitioner had taken a loan of Rs. 11,12,000/- for his domestic expenses and executed an agreement dated 11.08.2015. It was further stated that the accused handed over three post dated cheques in the sum of Rs. 4,00,000/-, Rs. 4,12,000/- and Rs. 4,00,000/-. However, when the said cheques were presented in the Bank, the same were dishonoured. Thereafter, the complainant sent a legal notice and later on a complaint was registered under Section 138 of the N.I. Act.
3. After registration of the complaint, the complainant was examined as AW/1 and counsel for the peti
The court upheld the trial court's discretion under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to deny the recall of a witness, emphasizing the necessity of timely evidence for 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.
Accused filthy language and threatened to complainant - Power to summon material witness or examine - It is well settled by Hon’ble Supreme Court that lacuna cannot be fulfilled in garb of power conf....
The main legal point established in the judgment is the discretionary and mandatory aspects of S.311 of Cr.P.C., emphasizing the need for judicious exercise of power and the requirement for the evide....
The essential test of 'just decision of the case' and the discretionary nature of Section 311 Cr.P.C, as interpreted by the Supreme Court, emphasizing the duty to examine material witnesses necessary....
The court upheld the dismissal of an application to recall a witness under Section 311 Cr.P.C., emphasizing the need for judicious use of this power to ensure fair trials without unnecessary delays.
The court emphasized that the power to recall witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, ensuring it is essential for a just decision and not merely to fill gaps in evidence.
The court emphasized that the power to recall witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, ensuring it is essential for a just decision and not merely to fill gaps or delay proc....
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
