https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313359 A magistrate may summon additional prosecution witnesses and direct proof of documents even after closure of prosecution evidence if the evidence is bona fide required for a just decision. The stage of trial does not by itself bar exercise of that power, and in a forgery matter the court may properly require proof of the disputed document and examination of material witnesses where they assist truth-finding. Where the accused's statement has not yet been recorded, a claim of prejudice from filling a supposed gap in the prosecution case may fail. The order directing further evidence was treated as valid and free from illegality. en-us Fri, 11 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 09 Apr 2024 16:04:27 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313359 A magistrate may summon additional prosecution witnesses and direct proof of documents even after closure of prosecution evidence if the evidence is bona fide required for a just decision. The stage of trial does not by itself bar exercise of that power, and in a forgery matter the court may properly require proof of the disputed document and examination of material witnesses where they assist truth-finding. Where the accused's statement has not yet been recorded, a claim of prejudice from filling a supposed gap in the prosecution case may fail. The order directing further evidence was treated as valid and free from illegality. Case-Laws Indian Laws Fri, 11 Oct 1991 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313359