2007 (7) TMI 719 - SC - Indian Laws

Summary

Issues involved: Challenge to order passed by a learned Single Judge of the Rajasthan High Court under Section 482 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 and refusal to recall the said order.

Background: Complainant's elder sister lodged a complaint alleging dowry demands, torture, and rape. FIR lodged under Sections 498A, 406 IPC. Another complaint lodged for offense under Section 376 read with Section 120B IPC. Appellants arrested, bail application rejected. Discrepancy in complainant's statements led to application under Section 311 of the Code.

Arguments: Appellants argued that High Court's orders lacked reasons for setting aside the trial court's decision under Section 311. They contended that no notice was issued before the order, and the recall application was erroneously rejected. Respondent No. 1 argued that the High Court's order was justified, even without prior notice to the appellants.

Section 311 of the Code: Provides discretionary authority to summon witnesses or examine persons essential to the case. The section aims to prevent failure of justice due to missing evidence. Court's duty to examine necessary witnesses for a just decision. The section applies to all proceedings and empowers the Court to summon witnesses at any stage.

Discretionary Power: Section 311 is discretionary but imposes an obligation on the Court to summon essential witnesses. Best available evidence should be presented. Court can draw adverse inferences if crucial evidence is not provided. The Court's role is to ensure justice by examining relevant witnesses.

Cross-Examination: Right to cross-examine a witness called by the Court arises under the Evidence Act. The Court should allow cross-examination to ensure fairness. Highlighted in Jagat Rai v. State of Maharashtra 1968CriLJ231.

Judgment: Appellants were not heard before the order was passed. High Court set aside the order due to lack of notice and non-impleadment of the appellants. The respondent's petition will be heard on merits. Appellants to be impleaded if not already done. No opinion expressed on the case's merits. Appeal allowed.