New 2025 Fourth Amendment tightens governance, executive roles and tech leadership for recognised stock exchanges, clearing corporations under 2018 Re...
The HC dismissed the petition, holding that petitioners failed to justify recall of the complainant-witness under Section 311 CrPC after closure of evidence and cannot invoke inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS/Section 482 CrPC to re-agitate matters already adjudicated in revision. The court found a seven-year delay and repeated non-diligence-fourteen missed opportunities to cross-examine CW-1 after permission under Section 145(2) NI Act-constituted abuse and prejudice to the complainant. Alleged medical incapacity of prior counsel was unproved. Two lower courts had concurrently refused re-opening; no perversity or failure of justice was shown. The petition, deemed a disguised second revision barred by substantive bars, was dismissed.
The HC dismissed the petition, holding that petitioners failed to justify recall of the complainant-witness under Section 311 CrPC after closure of evidence and cannot invoke inherent jurisdiction under Section 528 BNSS/Section 482 CrPC to re-agitate matters already adjudicated in revision. The court found a seven-year delay and repeated non-diligence-fourteen missed opportunities to cross-examine CW-1 after permission under Section 145(2) NI Act-constituted abuse and prejudice to the complainant. Alleged medical incapacity of prior counsel was unproved. Two lower courts had concurrently refused re-opening; no perversity or failure of justice was shown. The petition, deemed a disguised second revision barred by substantive bars, was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
