The court upheld the right to cross-examine witnesses, emphasizing the need for a fair trial and rectifying procedural errors in lower courts.

J U D G M E N T

Dated the 23^rd day of February, 2026 Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Public Prosecutor.

2. The petitioner is the accused in C.C.No.1250 of

2023 on the file of the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Koyilandy. The petitioner challenges Ext.P6 order by which his application seeking permission to recall PW3 for cross-examination was rejected by the learned Magistrate. The petitioner faces accusations under Sections 279 and 304A of the Indian Penal Code . PW3 is an occurrence witness. The learned Magistrate examined PW3 in chief. The counsel for the petitioner was not ready for cross-examination. The petitioner, thereafter, filed an application under Section 348 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita ( BNSS ) to recall PW3 for cross-examination. The learned Magistrate dismissed the application holding that there is no sufficient reason for recalling the witness. The learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the dismissal of the application causes prejudice to the petitioner.

3. Having regard to the submissions, Ext.P6 order dated 03.02.2026 in C.M.P.No.1/2026 in C.C.No.1250/2023 passed by the Judicial First Class Magistrate’s Court, Koyilandy is set aside. The learned Magistrate shall recall PW3. The petitioner is permitted to cross-examine PW3 on payment of Rs.1,000/- (Rupees One thousand only) as costs to the witness. The original petition is accordingly allowed.

Sd/-