TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2007 (7) TMI 719
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....de of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (in short the 'Code') and order dated 2.3.2006 refusing to recall the said order i.e. 20.2.2006. 3. Background facts need to be noted in brief. On 17.2.2005 the elder sister of the complainant lodged a complaint before the police station alleging that she was married to one Shri Sakeel. After sometime, the family of the husband of her sister started demanding dowry and torturing her. When the complainant went to meet her sister, she saw several wounds on her person. It was stated that both sisters were beaten and the complainant was raped by her family members and friends of in-laws. First Information Report (in short the 'FIR') was lodged for alleged commission of offences punishab....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....impleaded. The High Court by order dated 2.3.2006 rejected the application filed to recall the order dated 20.2.2006. 7. In support of the appeal, learned Counsel for the appellants submitted that the High Court's orders cannot be maintained because no reason has been indicated as to why the order of the trial court rejecting the prayer in terms of Section 311 of the Code was set aside. It was also submitted that since no notice has been issued to the appellants before the order was passed, the High Court erroneously rejected the prayer to recall the order. 8. Learned Counsel for the respondent No. 1 however submitted that this is a case where the High Court's order cannot be faulted even though when the first order was passed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s imposing on the Court the duty of examining a material witness who would not be otherwise brought before it. It is couched in the widest possible terms and calls for no limitation, either with regard to the stage at which the powers of the Court should be exercised, or with regard to the manner in which it should be exercised. It is not only the prerogative but also the plain duty of a Court to examine such of those witnesses as it considers absolutely necessary for doing justice between the State and the subject. There is a duty cast upon the Court to arrive at the truth by all lawful means and one of such means is the examination of witnesses of its own accord when for certain obvious reasons either party is not prepared to call witness....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s to be essential to the just decision of the case. It is a cardinal rule in the law of evidence that the best available evidence should be brought before the Court. Sections 60, 64 and 91 of the Indian Evidence Act, 1872 (in short, 'Evidence Act') are based on this rule. The Court is not empowered under the provisions of the Code to compel either the prosecution or the defence to examine any particular witness or witnesses on their side. This must be left to the parties. But in weighing the evidence, the Court can take note of the fact that the best available evidence has not been given, and can draw an adverse inference. The Court will often have to depend on intercepted allegations made by the parties, or on inconclusive inferenc....