Reexamining witnesses based on subsequent affidavits may undermine the integrity of the trial process and contravene established legal standards.

1. This revision is directed against the order dated 31/07/2008 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Ambikapur, in Sessions Trial No. 145/2007 rejecting the application filed by the accused / applicant for recalling the prosecutrix for examination holding that subsequent affidavit filed by the prosecutrix is not a ground for recalling the witness in accordance with S.231 read with 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure .

2. The order is challenged on the ground that the Trial Court has committed an illegality by rejecting the application of the accused / applicant for recalling the prosecutrix for examination.

3. Heard Shri P. K. Verma learned Sr. counsel with Shri Raghvendra Verma for the applicant and Ms. Sangita Mishra P. L. for the respondent / State, and perused the FIR, affidavit filed by the prosecutrix and copy of the application for recalling the prosecutrix.

4. It is submitted on behalf of the applicant that prosecutrix Sarojini has been cross examined at length by the defence but after her examination she has filed an affidavit on 10/03/2008 stating that the applicant has not committed rape on her and she had filed the FIR under the pressure of the people of some Avgadh Ashram. It is argued that after filing of the affidavit by the prosecutrix, her reexamination has become necessary. Reliance is placed on the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Mohd. Hussain Umar Kochra etc. v. Dalipsinghji and Another etc., 1969 KHC 617 : AIR 1970 SC 45 : 1969 (3) SCC 429 : 1970 SCC (Cri) 99 : 1970 CriLJ 9. in which it has been held that in the absence of an affidavit it is difficult to hold that there is change in circumstances especially relating to the witness who has been earlier examined by the prosecution.

5. On the other hand learned counsel for the respondent has supported the order impugned and argued that prosecutrix has been examined at length. Defence has also cross examined the witness at length; therefore, again calling her for reexamination would not be proper for just decision of the case.

6. In the instant case, the applicant is facing trial for the offence under S.376 of the Indian Penal Code. Prosecutrix was examined by the Trial Court on 05/12/2007. She was cross examined by the defence at length on 10/03/2008. When the case was adjourned, the accused / applicant filed an application under S.231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure for reexamination of the witness. Thereafter, the prosecutrix filed an affidavit on 10/03/2008 stating therein that the applicant has not committed rape on her and she had lodged the report at the instance of some persons of the Avgadh Ashram. S.231 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as under:
'Evidence for prosecution. -- (1) On the date so fixed, the Judge shall proceed to take all such evidence as may be produced in support of the prosecution.
(2) The Judge may, in his discretion, permit the cross examination of any witness or witnesses have been examined or recall any witness for further cross examination.'

7. S.311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure gives power to the Court to recall any witness for examination. Relevant portion of S.311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure reads as under:
'.. ..the Court shall summon and examine or recall and reexamine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case.'
Under the second part of S.311 of the