https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172508 A High Court will not ordinarily exercise inherent jurisdiction to interfere with a trial court's discretionary refusal to recall panch witnesses where the request is made after prosecution evidence has closed and at a belated stage. The trial court's view that it is not meant to collect evidence for a party, and that the complainant must bear the consequences of non-production of its witnesses, was found to disclose no illegality or impropriety. As no sufficient ground for interference was shown, the request to summon or recall the witnesses was declined and the impugned order was left undisturbed. en-us Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Aug 2015 12:52:52 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172508 A High Court will not ordinarily exercise inherent jurisdiction to interfere with a trial court's discretionary refusal to recall panch witnesses where the request is made after prosecution evidence has closed and at a belated stage. The trial court's view that it is not meant to collect evidence for a party, and that the complainant must bear the consequences of non-production of its witnesses, was found to disclose no illegality or impropriety. As no sufficient ground for interference was shown, the request to summon or recall the witnesses was declined and the impugned order was left undisturbed. Case-Laws Customs Thu, 01 Sep 2005 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=172508