https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449340 Section 391 CrPC permits additional evidence in appeal only on a showing of necessity, due diligence, and a real risk of failure of justice. The Delhi HC noted that the complainant had already been extensively cross-examined, the request to reopen evidence came after substantial delay, and no sufficient cause was shown for not pursuing the point earlier. The defence issue concerning the alleged email and the complainant's association with a third person had already been addressed, and the proposed third person was not examined. The court therefore rejected further cross-examination and additional evidence. en-us Mon, 05 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 10 Feb 2024 07:43:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449340 Section 391 CrPC permits additional evidence in appeal only on a showing of necessity, due diligence, and a real risk of failure of justice. The Delhi HC noted that the complainant had already been extensively cross-examined, the request to reopen evidence came after substantial delay, and no sufficient cause was shown for not pursuing the point earlier. The defence issue concerning the alleged email and the complainant's association with a third person had already been addressed, and the proposed third person was not examined. The court therefore rejected further cross-examination and additional evidence. Case-Laws Indian Laws Mon, 05 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449340