Belated witness recall under criminal procedure rejected where no justification or relevance was shown and trial delay would increase.

Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 gives wide discretion to recall an examined witness or summon a new witness, but the power must be exercised judiciously and not as a routine matter. A belated request made after closure of prosecution evidence and after the accused's statement under Section 313 had begun, without a satisfactory explanation for the delay or a clear showing of relevance, was refused. In a long-pending criminal trial, the court held that reopening evidence without justification would cause undue delay, so rejection of the application was justified.

---

---

Issues: Whether the application to recall an already examined witness and to summon additional witnesses under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 should be allowed at a highly belated stage in a long-pending criminal case.

Analysis: Section 311 confers wide power to recall any witness already examined or to summon a fresh witness, even after closure of evidence, but the power must be exercised judiciously and not routinely. The application was moved after long delay, after the prosecution evidence had closed and after the statement of the accused under Section 313 had begun. No satisfactory reason was shown for not examining the proposed witnesses earlier, and no sufficient basis was given for the relevance of their examination at that stage. The request to recall the witness was also made in a very old case where further delay would amount to reopening the matter without justification.

Conclusion: The application under Section 311 was not fit for allowance and its rejection was justified. The petition was dismissed.

Ratio Decidendi: The discretionary power under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 must be exercised on sound judicial grounds, and a belated request to recall or summon witnesses may be refused where no sufficient justification or relevance is shown and the request would unduly prolong the trial.

---