9911796707
TMI Blog1990 (2) TMI 7X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... petitions were filed by the prosecution under section 311, Crl. P. C., seeking to have six additional documents in the first case and one additional document in the second case, filed by recalling P. W. 1. The offences in both the cases were under sections 193 and 196 of the Indian Penal Code, read with section 136 and section 276(c) of the Income-tax Act for assessment orders for different assessment years. On the prosecution filing the above petitions for additional evidence, the petitioner objected to the same contending that the petitions were belated and were bound to prejudice the petitioner-accused and that PW-1 was incompetent to mark them and that permitting production of the documents would result in gaps of the prosecution bein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... desired relating to these additional documents as would meet the ends of justice. This view of the learned trial judge is in consonance with the decisions of the Supreme Court, particularly with Jamatraj Kewalji Govani v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1968 SC 178, wherein the court had emphasised the wide discretion given to the trial court to act as the exigencies of justice required. Emphasis was laid on the repeated use of the word "any" throughout section 540 (the present provision is section 311, Cr. P. C.). It was also laid down that there was no limitation on the powers of the court relatable to the stage to which the trial might have reached, provided the court was bona fide of the opinion that, for the just decision of the case, that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... clarified in the re-examination. After arguments were addressed by counsel for the defence, the prosecution came out with an application under section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code to recall PW-1 to elicit compliance with rules 16 to 18 and when the trial court had ordered the application, the learned judge reversed the order holding that this amounted to permitting the prosecution to fill up the lacuna. Reliance was also placed upon a decision of the Allahabad High Court in Bhagwana v. State of U. P. [1953] Crl. L. 1. 785, dealing with this petition of law and also a decision in Arjundas v. Basant Lal [1953] Crl. L. R. 980 (Vindhya Pradesh) wherein permission to recall the defence witness for further cross-examination was turned dow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
