<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2023 (2) TMI 1287 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313380</link>
    <description>Section 311 CrPC permits summoning a material witness to secure a just decision by bringing before court the best available evidence, and the power is not barred merely because evidence has closed or because no prior Section 161 statement exists. The High Court held that the witness could be examined because refusal would risk excluding relevant facts, while cautioning that the power cannot be used to reopen the case or alter the prosecution&#039;s nature. It further held that testimony could be taken through video conferencing where physical attendance would cause hardship and no prejudice was shown, and directed the trial court to facilitate the evidence within a controlled timetable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Apr 2024 20:46:11 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=749618" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (2) TMI 1287 - DELHI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313380</link>
      <description>Section 311 CrPC permits summoning a material witness to secure a just decision by bringing before court the best available evidence, and the power is not barred merely because evidence has closed or because no prior Section 161 statement exists. The High Court held that the witness could be examined because refusal would risk excluding relevant facts, while cautioning that the power cannot be used to reopen the case or alter the prosecution&#039;s nature. It further held that testimony could be taken through video conferencing where physical attendance would cause hardship and no prejudice was shown, and directed the trial court to facilitate the evidence within a controlled timetable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=313380</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>