O R D E R

Dated this the 23^rd day of February, 2026 The petitioner is the accused in S.T.No.916/2021 on the file of the Court of the Special Judicial First Class Magistrate (N.I.Act Cases), Kozhikode, (‘Trial Court’, in short), which has been filed by the 2^nd respondent alleging the commission of an offence punishable under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 (‘NI Act’, in short).

2. The petitioner has stated in the Criminal Miscellaneous Case that, although PW1 was examined and his evidence was closed, due to an inadvertent omission on the part of the petitioner’s erstwhile counsel, certain pertinent questions were omitted to be put to PW1. It is after the petitioner engaged the present counsel that he came to learn that certain crucial questions were not asked to PW1. In the above background, the petitioner had filed an application to recall and re-examine PW1. The said application was opposed by the 2^nd respondent.

Consequently, by the impugned Annexure III order, the Trial Court rejected the application on the ground that incompetence of a counsel is not a ground to recall a witness. Annexure III order is ex-facie erroneous and unsustainable in law. Hence, the