Back
RAJEEV SINGH
Nazre Alam – Appellant
Versus
State of U. P. – Respondent
JUDGMENT :
RAJEEV SINGH, J.
1. Heard learned counsel for the applicant and Shri Rao Narendra Singh, learned A.G.A. assisted by Ms. Nikita Mishra.
2. The present application has been filed with a prayer to quash the order dated 21.09.2024 passed in S.T. No. 161 of 2021, under Sections 366, 376-D, 506 I.P.C. rejecting the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C.
3. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that the applicant was falsely implicated in the present case. It is further submitted that the applicant was not named in the F.I.R. and his name was surfaced for the first time during the course of investigation in the statement of the victim recorded under Section 164 Cr.P.C. Thereafter, her Mazeed statement under Section 161 Cr.P.C. was also recorded, in which, she again reiterated her version given under Section 164 Cr.P.C. before the Magistrate. It is also submitted that charge sheet was submitted by the Investigating Officer, on which, cognizance was taken by the court and the matter was committed to court of Session. After framing of charges, the victim was called for examination-in-chief on 25.01.2023 and on the same day, she was cross-examined also. Thereafter, all the prosecuti
The court upheld the trial court's decision to deny the recall of a witness under Section 311 Cr.P.C. due to lack of specific questions and significant delay in filing the application.
The right to cross-examine witnesses is fundamental to a fair trial, and courts must allow re-examination if essential for justice.
The court determines that the discretionary power under Section 311 CrPC for summoning witnesses must be exercised judiciously; prior inconsistent evidence negates the necessity for re-examination.
The court reaffirmed that recall and re-examination of witnesses under Section 311 CrPC should only occur when essential for justice, particularly rejecting unnecessary processes that may lead to an ....
The power under Section 311, Cr.P.C. should be exercised with restraint and caution, especially at the final stage of the trial, and delay in filing the application may impact the court's decision.
The court held that the accused has a right to cross-examine the victim, but restrictions apply to protect minors, emphasizing the need for relevance and care in questioning under the provisions of S....
The discretionary power of the Trial Court under Section 311 Cr.P.C. to recall and re-examine witnesses to rectify ambiguity and ensure a just decision.
Section 311 of Cr.PC. empowers Court to call any person as witness at any stage of inquiry, trial or other proceeding in order to reach to just decision of case.
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
