Case Note & Summary
The present appeal arises from a judgment of the High Court of Tripura which set aside the Trial Court's order rejecting an application under Section 311 CrPC for recall of the prosecutrix (PW-1) for further cross-examination. The case involves allegations of rape under Sections 342, 376(1), and 506 IPC against the respondent-accused. The prosecutrix had lodged a written complaint on 27.06.2016 alleging that the respondent forcibly confined her, tore her clothes, and committed rape, and threatened to kill her if she disclosed the incident. The Trial Court had rejected the application for recall, finding that the accused had ample opportunity to cross-examine the prosecutrix and that the recall was sought to fill gaps in the defence. The High Court, in revision, set aside this order and allowed the recall. The Supreme Court, in appeal by the State, examined the scope of Section 311 CrPC and held that the power to recall a witness is discretionary and must be exercised only if the evidence is essential for a just decision. The court noted that the prosecutrix had already been cross-examined at length and that the recall was sought after a significant delay, indicating an attempt to fill gaps in the defence. The Supreme Court found that the High Court had erred in interfering with the Trial Court's discretion, as the Trial Court's order was neither perverse nor illegal. Consequently, the Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order, and restored the Trial Court's order rejecting the recall application.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Recall of Witness - Section 311 CrPC - Power to summon or recall witness - The power under Section 311 CrPC is discretionary and must be exercised only if the evidence is essential for a just decision and not to fill gaps in the defence or to cause prejudice to the other side. The court must ensure that the recall is not an abuse of process and that the witness is not subjected to unnecessary harassment. (Paras 1-12)
B) Rape Trial - Cross-examination of Prosecutrix - Section 311 CrPC - Recall for further cross-examination - In a rape trial, the prosecutrix cannot be recalled for further cross-examination merely because the accused failed to cross-examine her properly earlier. The court must consider the stage of trial, the reasons for recall, and the necessity of the evidence. (Paras 2-10)
C) Criminal Procedure - High Court's Power of Revision - Section 397 CrPC - Interference with Trial Court's Order - The High Court in revision should not interfere with a discretionary order of the Trial Court unless it is perverse, illegal, or suffers from a material irregularity. The High Court's order setting aside the Trial Court's rejection of recall was not justified as the Trial Court had exercised its discretion properly. (Paras 1-12)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the Trial Court's order rejecting the application under Section 311 CrPC for recall of the prosecutrix for further cross-examination, and whether such recall is permissible in law.
Final Decision
The Supreme Court allowed the appeal, set aside the High Court's order dated 14.03.2024, and restored the Trial Court's order dated 06.02.2024 rejecting the application under Section 311 CrPC for recall of the prosecutrix.
Law Points
- Section 311 CrPC
- recall of witness
- cross-examination
- rape trial
- prosecutrix
- just decision
- essential for just decision
- gap-filling
- abuse of process
- criminal procedure
Case Details
2026 LawText (SC) (01) 141
Criminal Appeal No. 2848 of 2026 (Arising out of SLP (Crl.) No. 5986 of 2025)
Subscribe to unlock Case Details (Citation, Judge, Date & more)
Subscribe Now
Nature of Litigation
Criminal appeal against High Court order allowing recall of prosecutrix for further cross-examination under Section 311 CrPC in a rape case.
Remedy Sought
The State of Tripura sought setting aside of the High Court order dated 14.03.2024 which allowed the respondent-accused's application for recall of the prosecutrix for further cross-examination.
Filing Reason
The State appealed against the High Court's order permitting recall of the prosecutrix, arguing that the Trial Court had correctly rejected the application as the accused had ample opportunity to cross-examine and the recall was sought to fill gaps in defence.
Previous Decisions
The Trial Court (Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala) rejected the application under Section 311 CrPC for recall of the prosecutrix on 06.02.2024. The High Court of Tripura set aside this order on 14.03.2024 in Criminal Petition No. 07 of 2024 and allowed the recall.
Issues
Whether the High Court was justified in setting aside the Trial Court's order rejecting the application under Section 311 CrPC for recall of the prosecutrix for further cross-examination.
Whether the recall of the prosecutrix for further cross-examination is permissible under Section 311 CrPC in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Submissions/Arguments
The appellant (State) argued that the Trial Court had correctly exercised its discretion in rejecting the recall application as the accused had ample opportunity to cross-examine the prosecutrix and the recall was sought to fill gaps in the defence.
The respondent (accused) argued that the recall was necessary for a just decision and that the High Court had correctly allowed the application.
Ratio Decidendi
The power under Section 311 CrPC to recall a witness is discretionary and must be exercised only if the evidence is essential for a just decision. The recall cannot be allowed to fill gaps in the defence or to cause prejudice to the other side. The Trial Court's discretion in rejecting the recall application was proper and the High Court erred in interfering with it.
Judgment Excerpts
The present appeal arises out of the judgment and order dated 14.03.2024 passed by the High Court of Tripura at Agartala... whereby the High Court set aside the order dated 06.02.2024 passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala... and allowed the application filed under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973... permitting the recall of the prosecutrix (PW-1) for further cross-examination.
The power under Section 311 CrPC is discretionary and must be exercised only if the evidence is essential for a just decision and not to fill gaps in the defence or to cause prejudice to the other side.
Procedural History
On 27.06.2016, a written complaint was lodged by the prosecutrix leading to FIR No. 2016 WAW 052 against the respondent-accused for offences under Sections 342, 376(1), and 506 IPC. The Trial Court (Additional Sessions Judge, West Tripura, Agartala) in Sessions Trial (Type-1) No. 38 of 2017 rejected the application under Section 311 CrPC for recall of the prosecutrix on 06.02.2024. The respondent-accused filed Criminal Petition No. 07 of 2024 before the High Court of Tripura, which set aside the Trial Court's order on 14.03.2024 and allowed the recall. The State of Tripura filed SLP (Crl.) No. 5986 of 2025 before the Supreme Court, which was converted into Criminal Appeal No. 2848 of 2026.
Acts & Sections
- Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (CrPC): 311
- Indian Penal Code, 1860 (IPC): 342, 376(1), 506
