Back
FARJAND ALI
Pushpa – Appellant
Versus
State of Rajasthan, Through PP – Respondent
ORDER
1. By way of filing the instant revision petition challenge has been made to the order dated 17.04.2023 passed by the learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Churu in Criminal Case No.10/2012 whereby the application filed by the accusedpetitioners under Section 233 (3) of the Cr.P.C. has been rejected and the prayer to summon three police officers has been declined.
2. Bereft of elaborated details, the brief facts necessary for disposal of the instant criminal revision petition are that the petitioners are facing trial which is pending before the Court of learned Additional District & Sessions Judge, Churu (hereinafter referred to as 'the learned trial Court') since year 2012 for a considerable long period the trial got protracted. There was a list of 24 prosecution witnesses, out of which 10 witnesses were produced and the prosecution did not opt to produce the remaining witnesses thus, the learned trial Court had dispensed with their evidence. After recording the evidence of the prosecution witnesses, an explanation under Section 313 Cr.P.C. was sought from the accused petitioners wherein the petitioners claimed the evidence of the prosecution to be false and an inclina
The accused's right to summon defense witnesses is fundamental and must be upheld unless there are compelling reasons to deny such requests.
The accused has an absolute right to summon witnesses in defense, and the trial court must allow such requests unless there are cogent reasons to deny them.
The accused has an indefeasible right to produce witnesses in his defense, and the court has a plenary power to summon any person at any stage of the proceedings to attain the highest goal of justice....
Co-accused cannot be summoned as defense witnesses in their trials under the Code without considering critical legal provisions; access to justice must be balanced with procedural integrity.
The accused has an unfettered right to summon witnesses essential for the defence, and the trial court's discretion to reject such requests is limited to preventing vexation or delay.
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 court emphasized the accused's right to summon witnesses, highlighting the necessity for the trial court to provide justifiable reasons for any refusal.
Criminal Procedure requires strong evidence for summoning additional accused; mere witness statements may not suffice, particularly in light of delays in FIR.
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
