Section 311 CrPC witness recall requires necessity for a just decision; late requests to fill gaps need not be allowed.

Section 311 CrPC permits summoning, examining, recalling, or re-examining a witness only where the evidence is essential to a just decision. The power is wide but must be exercised judicially and not to fill gaps in the defence or prolong trial. Here, the Income Tax documents were already on record and exhibited, and the accused had cross-examined the complainant on them. Because the request to summon the Income Tax Officer was made at a late stage after opportunities for defence evidence had already been given, the evidence was not shown to be necessary. The refusal to summon the witness was therefore upheld, and no basis was found for interference under Section 482 CrPC.

---

---

Issues: Whether the refusal to summon the Income Tax Officer as a witness under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was justified and whether interference under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 was warranted.

Analysis: Section 311 empowers the Court to summon, examine, recall, or re-examine a witness at any stage only when the evidence appears essential to the just decision of the case. The power is wide, but it must be exercised judicially and not to fill up lacunae or to prolong the trial. The documents sought from the Income Tax Department had already been produced, taken on record, and exhibited, and the petitioners had cross-examined the complainant on those documents. The application under Section 311 was moved at a later stage after several opportunities had already been granted for defence evidence. In these circumstances, the Income Tax Officer's examination was not shown to be necessary for a just decision.

Conclusion: The refusal to summon the Income Tax Officer was upheld and no ground was made out for exercise of inherent jurisdiction under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.

Ratio Decidendi: A witness may be summoned or recalled under Section 311 only when the evidence is essential to the just decision of the case, and not when the request is made late and the material is already on record or the application would merely fill a lacuna.

---