Back
ANIL KUMAR CHOUDHARY
Pramod Narang @ Promoad Narang @ Pramod Kumar Narang, S/o. Late I. S. Narang – Appellant
Versus
State of Jharkhand – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
Anil Kumar Choudhary, J.
1. Heard the parties.
2. This criminal miscellaneous petition has been filed invoking the jurisdiction of this Court under Section 482 Cr.P.C. with a prayer to quash the order dated 20.09.2023, passed by the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi in Criminal Revision No. 416 of 2023 in connection with M.C.A. No. 3573 of 2023 arising out of Complaint Case No. 1887 of 2016 by which the learned Judicial Commissioner, Ranchi has dismissed the Criminal Revision No. 416 of 2023 at the stage of admission itself, being not maintainable.
3. The brief facts of the case is that the petitioner is the complainant of Complaint Case No. 1887 of 2016 in which cognizance has been taken by the learned Magistrate concerned on 13.02.2017 for the offences punishable under Section 406/420 of the Indian Penal Code. After closing the evidence before charge, the case was fixed for framing of charge. In the meantime, a petition under section 311 Cr.P.C. was filed by the complainant on 03.06.2023 which was rejected by the trial court vide order dated 01.08.2023. Again challenging the said order dated 01.08.2023, Criminal Revision No. 416 of 2023 was filed in the Court of Judici
A revision application against an order rejecting a recall of witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable, as established by prior judgments.
The court upheld that Section 311 Cr.P.C. allows recall of witnesses only when essential for justice, emphasizing the need for strong justification for such applications.
The court emphasized the necessity of recalling witnesses to ensure a fair trial and prevent failure of justice.
The court emphasized that the application for recalling witnesses should not be allowed if it is filed to delay the trial or to cover up lacunae.
Order rejecting Section 311 CrPC application to examine hearsay witness, not essential for just decision, is interlocutory and revision-barred under Section 397(2); no inherent power interference abs....
The court emphasized that the discretion under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised judiciously, ensuring that the recall of witnesses is essential for a just decision.
Orders under Section 311 Cr.P.C. are interlocutory and revisions against such orders are not maintainable, affirming the court's power to allow subsequent applications to ensure justice.
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....
Power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. exercisable at any trial stage; court must examine if additional evidence essential for just decision, rejection merely on ground of arguments stage improper.
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
