A.K.GOHIL
Uday Singh – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent
The petitioner, who is complainant, has filed this revision against the impugned order dated 5.7.2003 passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Gohad in Sessions Trial No.8 of 1997. By the impugned order, learned trial Court rejected the application of complainant for recalling PW 11 Vishwanath Sharma. The trial Court dismissed the said application on the ground that the same has been filed belatedly after lapse of two years and lengthy cross-examination has already been done with the said witness. Though PW 11 Vishwanath Sharma has been declared hostile in the Sessions Trial, but the submission of the learned counsel for the petitioner is that earlier in another case No. 195/1995, the said witness has given a statement that he is being threatened not to give any evidence in murder case of Narendra Singh and questions and explanation relating to his earlier statement could not be asked. The reason might be that the Government Pleader may not have full instruction in the matter. Therefore, the re-cross-examination of PW 11 is necessary to confront him from his earlier statement in other case. Prayer for recalling the said witness for the purposes of re-cross-examination is
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.