Section 311 CPC allows recalling witnesses only when essential for a just decision, not to fill gaps in testimony.

O R D E R

Heard Mr.AayiramK.Selvakumar, learned Counsel appearing for the Revision Petitioner. Since the Criminal Revision Petition is disposed of at the admission stage itself and in view of the order to be passed in this petition, notice to the Respondent is dispensed with.

2. This Criminal Revision Petition has been filed by the Revision Petitioner to set aside the order passed by the learned Additional District Munsif, Valliyoor in Crl.MP.No.31 of 2025, dated 04.09.2025 in C.C.No.160 of 2023 by allowing this Revision Petition and to direct the Trial Court to recall the PW1 at the earliest.

3.The Revision Petitioner is the accused and the Respondent is the complainant. The Revision Petitioner is facing trial for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act. The complainant was examined in chief as PW.1 and he was also cross examined. Contending that since some important questions were omitted to be asked during the cross examination of PW.1, PW.1 has to be recalled, the Revision Petitioner has filed Crl.MP.No.31 of 2025 before the Trial Court, under Section 311 of Cr.PC to recall PW.1 for further cross examination. The said petition was opposed by the Respondent herein by filing a counter affidavit therein, contending that the said Petition to recall PW.1 is false and frivolous one. The learned Additional District Munsif, Valliyoor by impugned order dated 04.09.2025 in Crl.MP.No.31 of 2025 in C.C.No. 160 of 2023 had dismissed the said Petition to recall. Aggrieved against the same, this Criminal Revision Case has been filed by the Revision Petitioner.

4. According to the Revision Petitioner, some important questions, which are highly necessitated to establish the innocence of the Revision Petitioner, were omitted to be asked during the cross examination of PW. 1 and hence, to meet the ends of justice, recalling of PW.1 for further cross examination is necessary.

5. For better appreciation, Section 311 of Cr.PC reads as under:-

“311. Power to summon material witness, or examine person present: Any Court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this Code, summon any person as a witness, or examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness, or recall and re-examine any person already examined, and the Court shall summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case.”

6. Section 311 of Cr.PC operates in two parts, the first part clothes the Court with a power to summon or examine any person in attendance or recall or re-examine any person already examined. The second part mandates that the Court shall summon and examine or recall and re-examine such person, if his evidence appears to be essential to the just decision of the case. Thus, first part of Section gives a discretionary power to the Court to summon any person as a witness or to recall or re- examine the person already examined. Such a course of action is only permissible if the Court is satisfied that the prayer to recall and re- examine the witness is not made to fill up the lacuna and that the non- summoning of the witnesses would cause a serious prejudice to the accused.

7. The Honourable Supreme Court, in2013 (14) SCC 461 ( Rajaram Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Bihar , was pleased to summarise the principles to be borne in mind, while exercising the power under Section 311 Code of Criminal Procedure , as under:-

“23. From a conspectus consideration of the above decisions, while dealing wi