https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312716 The trial court's powers to summon material witnesses, ask relevant questions, direct production of documents, and alter or add charges were treated as broad enough to meet the ends of justice, so writ interference with an ongoing trial was not justified. The prosecution scheme for sessions trials was also upheld: the State acts through a Public Prosecutor, and the complainant's role cannot displace that statutory arrangement. Section 302 was read as confined to Magistrates' courts, and the challenge to the validity of the prosecution provisions failed. The petition was therefore found to lack merit. en-us Thu, 27 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Mar 2024 15:17:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312716 The trial court's powers to summon material witnesses, ask relevant questions, direct production of documents, and alter or add charges were treated as broad enough to meet the ends of justice, so writ interference with an ongoing trial was not justified. The prosecution scheme for sessions trials was also upheld: the State acts through a Public Prosecutor, and the complainant's role cannot displace that statutory arrangement. Section 302 was read as confined to Magistrates' courts, and the challenge to the validity of the prosecution provisions failed. The petition was therefore found to lack merit. Case-Laws Indian Laws Thu, 27 Sep 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=312716