https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304369 Section 233 of the Code of Criminal Procedure gives an accused a substantive right to adduce defence evidence and seek process for summoning witnesses of choice. Refusal is justified only if the request is vexatious, delayed, or intended to defeat the ends of justice. Defence expert witnesses may still be relevant even after prosecution experts have testified, because expert opinion based on the existing record can rebut the prosecution case. A witness is not disqualified merely because they reside outside India or previously appeared as counsel in related proceedings. The refusal to summon the proposed defence witnesses was therefore unjustified, and the defence was entitled to examine them. en-us Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 22 Sep 2022 15:17:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304369 Section 233 of the Code of Criminal Procedure gives an accused a substantive right to adduce defence evidence and seek process for summoning witnesses of choice. Refusal is justified only if the request is vexatious, delayed, or intended to defeat the ends of justice. Defence expert witnesses may still be relevant even after prosecution experts have testified, because expert opinion based on the existing record can rebut the prosecution case. A witness is not disqualified merely because they reside outside India or previously appeared as counsel in related proceedings. The refusal to summon the proposed defence witnesses was therefore unjustified, and the defence was entitled to examine them. Case-Laws Indian Laws Wed, 22 Nov 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304369