Case Note & Summary
The petitioner, Suresh, was being prosecuted for the offence of murder punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code (IPC) in Sessions Case No. 439/2009 pending before the Principal City Civil and Sessions Judge, Bengaluru. After the prosecution concluded its evidence, the petitioner filed an application under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (Cr.P.C.) seeking recall of prosecution witnesses PW-2, PW-3, and PW-11 for the purpose of cross-examination. The application was opposed by the prosecution. The trial court rejected the application by order dated 09.04.2015, holding that the reason assigned by the petitioner—that his advocate was unwell on 20.02.2015—was not a sufficient justification to seek recall of witnesses. The trial court also observed that the advocate for the accused was trying to control the proceedings. Aggrieved by this order, the petitioner filed a criminal petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. before the High Court of Karnataka at Bengaluru, praying to quash the impugned order and allow the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. The High Court, after hearing the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned High Court Government Pleader for the respondent-State, allowed the petition. The court held that the trial court's discretion under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised to promote the cause of justice and not to defeat it. The court noted that the right to cross-examination is a vital component of a fair trial and that the advocate's illness on the date of cross-examination constituted sufficient cause for recall. The High Court quashed the impugned order dated 09.04.2015 and directed the trial court to recall PW-2, PW-3, and PW-11 for cross-examination on the same day or on a day convenient to the court, with a direction to the petitioner's counsel to complete the cross-examination on the date fixed.
Headnote
A) Criminal Procedure - Recall of Witnesses - Section 311 Cr.P.C. - Right to Fair Trial - The petitioner, accused of murder under Section 302 IPC, sought recall of PWs 2, 3, and 11 for cross-examination after prosecution evidence concluded, citing advocate's illness on the date of cross-examination. The trial court rejected the application, holding the reason insufficient. The High Court allowed the petition, quashing the impugned order and permitting recall, emphasizing that the right to cross-examination is a vital component of fair trial and that the court should exercise its discretion liberally to secure justice. (Paras 1-5) B) Criminal Procedure - Discretion under Section 311 Cr.P.C. - Liberal Exercise - The High Court held that the trial court's discretion under Section 311 Cr.P.C. must be exercised to promote the cause of justice and not to defeat it. The court observed that the advocate's illness on the date of cross-examination constituted sufficient cause for recall, and the trial court's rejection was too technical. The petition was allowed, and the trial court was directed to recall the witnesses for cross-examination on the same day or on a day convenient to the court. (Paras 4-5)
Issue of Consideration
Whether the trial court was justified in rejecting the application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recall of prosecution witnesses for cross-examination on the ground that the advocate's illness was not sufficient justification.
Final Decision
The High Court allowed the petition, quashed the impugned order dated 09.04.2015, and directed the trial court to recall PW-2, PW-3, and PW-11 for cross-examination on the same day or on a day convenient to the court, with a direction to the petitioner's counsel to complete the cross-examination on the date fixed.
Law Points
- Recall of witnesses under Section 311 Cr.P.C.
- Right to fair trial
- Effective cross-examination
- Discretion of trial court
- Sufficient cause for recall
