https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8432 The Karnataka High Court noted that a prosecution request to recall P.W. 1 after closure of evidence and arguments, solely to prove an omitted sanction document said to have been filed through inadvertence, is ordinarily not justified because a party should not be allowed to fill gaps in its case at that stage. The Court indicated that if the sanction had in fact been obtained and was already on record with the complaint, the Magistrate could consider that document in accordance with law, but recall of the witness on these facts was not warranted. The request was therefore declined. en-us Fri, 27 Aug 1971 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Apr 2009 11:02:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8432 The Karnataka High Court noted that a prosecution request to recall P.W. 1 after closure of evidence and arguments, solely to prove an omitted sanction document said to have been filed through inadvertence, is ordinarily not justified because a party should not be allowed to fill gaps in its case at that stage. The Court indicated that if the sanction had in fact been obtained and was already on record with the complaint, the Magistrate could consider that document in accordance with law, but recall of the witness on these facts was not warranted. The request was therefore declined. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 27 Aug 1971 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=8432