SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
Listen Audio Icon Pause Audio Icon
judgment-img

2023 Supreme(MP) 30

VIJAY KUMAR SHUKLA
Shankarlal – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent


Advocates:
Sanjay Kumar Sharma for applicants; R.S. Bais, Government Advocate, for respondent/State.

ORDER

1. This is a petition under section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure being aggrieved by the order dated 9.1.2023 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Alot, Dist. Ratlam in Sessions Trial No.05/2016 whereby the application filed under section 311 Cr.P.C. for recall of witness in Crime No.276/2015 by the respondent prosecution has been allowed.

2. The applicants are accused person in a complaint filed by Narsingh for commission of offences under sections 420, 467, 468, 471 IPC. The Magistrate had sent the same for investigation to the police.

3. Counsel for the applicants submits that after closure of evidence of prosecution witnesses twice and after recording the statement of accused under section 311, an application has been filed to produce handwriting expert and other documents and to recall investigation officer for evidence has been erroneously allowed. The said application ought to have been rejected by the trial Court as the same was filed by the prosecution to fill up the lacuna which is not permissible under the provisions of section 311 Cr.P.C. To bolster his submissions, he has placed reliance on an order dated 20.1.2016 passed in Cr.R. No.1626/2015 by Coordinate

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

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

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top