Wide power to receive evidence under Section 311 CrPC permits additional material when needed for fair adjudication.

Section 311 CrPC confers wide power on the trial court to summon or receive evidence even after both sides have closed their evidence, if the material is essential for a just decision. A mere omission or oversight during trial is not the same as filling a true lacuna in the prosecution case, and additional evidence may be permitted where it serves fair adjudication. Applying that principle, the SC held that the High Court erred in disturbing the trial court's order allowing production of a postal receipt after evidence had concluded and the matter was posted for judgment; the additional material was restored on record, with liberty to the accused to cross-examine on it.

---

---

Issues: Whether the trial court could permit the complainant to produce a postal receipt at the stage after conclusion of evidence and after the case had been posted for judgment, in exercise of the power to summon or receive evidence, or whether such permission was impermissible as filling up a lacuna in the prosecution case.

Analysis: The power under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure is of the widest amplitude and may be exercised even after both sides have closed evidence, if the material is essential for the just decision of the case. A lacuna in the prosecution case is not to be confused with an oversight or omission in the course of trial, and the court is not barred from allowing production of material merely because it may support the prosecution further. The controlling consideration is whether the evidence is necessary for a fair and just adjudication.

Conclusion: The High Court erred in interfering with the trial court's order allowing production of the postal receipt. The order permitting the additional material to be placed on record was restored in favour of the complainant, and the accused was left free to seek cross-examination on the new material.

---