2011 (12) TMI 607

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., New Delhi whereby an application under Section 311 of Cr. P.C. of the petitioner was dismissed. 2. The petitioner filed the aforesaid application for recalling PW-3 for cross-examination and also for examination of PWs Kannaiya Lal Jain, Prem Chand and Bhupender, and M.K. Zutshi. The said application was dismissed vide the impugned order by the ACMM. While dismissing the application, the l....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....rd further shows that the case is very old one of the year 1987 and after the closing of evidence on 31-10-2006 even the statement under section 313 Cr. P.C. of two accused persons has already been recorded in the year 2010. The present application under section 311 Cr. P.C. has been filed by complainant (DRI) at a very belated stage i.e. in the year 2010. Although it is a settled law that the sai....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....counsel for the petitioner/department stated that recalling of PW-3 for cross-examination after charge and examination of the other witnesses named above, was essential for the just decision of the case. 4. There is no dispute with regard to the proposition of law that under Section 311 Cr. P.C. the Court has power to recall any witness or witnesses already examined or to summon any fresh wi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....re granted to the petitioner even for the post charge evidence with the last opportunity given on 8-3-2006. PW-3 B.S. Vasudev, who was sought to be recalled, was not produced for cross-examination after charge. On 31-10-2006, the prosecution evidence was closed. The statement of accused under Section 313 Cr. P.C. has already been recorded in the year 2010. Not only that, no reason has been given f....