The power to recall witnesses is a discretionary power to be exercised sparingly for the ends of justice. It cannot be invoked to fill lacunae in the prosecution or defense case or to provide an unfair advantage to any party.

JUDGMENT :

MANISHA BATRA, J.

1. The instant revision petition has been filed by the petitioner against the order dated 20.05.2024, passed by the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Hisar in case arising out of FIR No. 293 dated 23.11.2021, registered under Section 304 of IPC and Sections 25 and 30 of the Arms Act, 1959 at Police Station Bass, District Hisar, whereby an application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. had been partly allowed and the prayer made by the petitioner for re-examining four witnesses, namely Raj Singh, Sanup, Nitesh and Azad Singh/petitioner, had been declined.

2. Brief facts relevant for the purpose of disposal of this petition are that the aforementioned FIR was registered on the basis of a complaint moved by the present petitioner/complainant alleging that on 22.11.2021, his son Sonu had gone to attend the video of one Vijay at village Puthi Samain. When the marriage procession was at the entrance point of the house of the bride, respondent No. 2 Narender Kumar had started firing shots from his licensed gun. A shot fired by him had hit the chest of petitioner’s son, who had been rushed to the hospital but was declared to be brought dead. The aforementioned FIR was registered. Respondent No. 2 was arrested. He faced trial. His statement under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. was recorded.

3. As revealed from the record, after recording of statement of respondent No. 2 under Section 313 of Cr.P.C., the petitioner moved an application making prayer for summoning one Devender, Photographer, who was preparing the video of the marriage procession at the relevant time and also prayed for re-examination of witnesses Raj Singh, Sanup, Nitesh and himself. Learned trial Court, after considering the contentions raised by both the parties, partly allowed the application, thereby accepting the prayer of the petitioner for summoning of Devender, Photographer as a witness. However, with regard to re-examination of the above named witnesses, it was observed that two of those witnesses had already been declared hostile. Even the complainant had been examined in detail and as such, no ground had been made out to recall them. Aggrieved from the said order, the instant revision petition has been filed.

4. It is argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that the impugned order is not sustainable in the eyes of law to the extent to which the prayer made by him qua re-examination of above named witnesses had been declined. It is submitted that witness Devender, who is a Photographer, was present at the time of occurrence and had prepared a video. A perusal of the said video showed that respondent No. 2 was armed with a double barrel gun. He along with witnesses Nitesh, Sanup and other persons as well as the deceased was seen to be present in marriage procession at the time of occurrence. He has given a pen drive containing said video to the complainant only after recording of the statement of respondent No. 2 under Section 313 of Cr.P.C. and just a few days prior to his moving application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. It is submitted that since this video shows the presence of the witnesses Nitesh and Sanup along with the victim as well as respondent No. 2, therefore, their re-examination is must for the purpose of confronting them with the said video and to establish their presence, which has not been asserted by them in their respective sworn depositions.

5. It is further argued by learned counsel for the petitioner that summoning of some offic