Supreme Court

Satbir Singh vs. State of Haryana and Ors.

MANU/SC/0954/2023

29.08.2023

Criminal

Discretionary power under Section 311 of CrPC should be invoked, when it is essential for the just decision of the case

The present appeal has been filed against the order passed by the High Court, by which the prayer for recall of the Appellant as a witness in the trial before the Court below for further examination has been rejected.

In Manju Devi v State of Rajasthan, this Court emphasized that, a discretionary power like Section 311 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC) is to enable the Court to keep the record straight and to clear any ambiguity regarding the evidence, whilst also ensuring no prejudice is caused to anyone. In Harendra Rai v State of Bihar, a 3-Judge Bench of this Court was of the opinion that, Section 311 of CrPC should be invoked when ‘… it is essential for the just decision of the case.’

A case for interference has been made out. Under the peculiar facts of the present case, the request for recall of the Appellant under Section 311 of CrPC was justified, as at the relevant point of time in his initial deposition, there was no occasion for him to bring the relevant facts relating to similarity of data before the Court, which arose after the CFSL expert was examined.

Further, if opportunity is given for re-examination, Respondents no.2 to 9 will not be prejudiced as they will have ample opportunity to cross-examine the appellant. The orders of the Courts below are set aside. The application of the Appellant under Section 311 of CrPC for his recall to be further examined as a witness stands allowed. Appeal allowed.

Tags : Recall Witness Examination

Share :