Witness recall under Section 311 CrPC may be allowed when needed for fair defence and justice, even in a large joint trial.

Section 311 CrPC confers a wide power to recall witnesses at any stage where further evidence is essential for a just decision. The decisive question is whether refusal would impair a fair defence or risk failure of justice, not merely the stage of trial or a change of counsel. A request confined to material omissions and made bona fide is permissible, but not one that fills a lacuna or prejudices the prosecution. On the facts, the joint trial of 148 accused and the scale of evidence supported inadvertent omission, so recall of the prosecution witnesses was maintainable and the trial court's refusal was unsustainable.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused were entitled to recall prosecution witnesses for further cross-examination under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, in a joint trial involving a large number of accused and allegations of inadvertent omissions in cross-examination.

Analysis: The power under Section 311 is wide and may be exercised at any stage if the evidence is essential for a just decision. The determining consideration is not the stage of the trial but whether denial of recall would impair a fair defence or cause failure of justice. A mere change of counsel is not by itself decisive; the Court must assess whether the requested recall is bona fide, limited to material omissions, and necessary to ensure fair opportunity without converting the request into a disguised attempt to fill a lacuna or unduly prejudice the prosecution. On the facts, the joint trial of 148 accused, the large volume of evidence, and the specific nature of the requested cross-examination showed a plausible case of inadvertent omission rather than an abuse of process.

Conclusion: The applications for recall of the named prosecution witnesses were maintainable and ought to have been allowed; the refusal by the trial court was unsustainable.

---