Single judge dismissed an application under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the rejection of a petition to recall witnesses examined in 2016 in a trial pending for eight years, finding no ground for interference.
This page shows the compact analysis of this judgement. The full analysis — procedural history, issue-by-issue holdings with ratio and obiter, advocates, and paragraph-level evidence for every claim — is being added to the record in batches and will appear here when this judgement has been through it.
Court No. - 10
Case :- APPLICATION U/S 482 No. - 4047 of 2022
Applicant :- Mohammad Akib Khan Opposite Party :- State Of U.P. Thru. Secy. Home And Another Counsel for Applicant :- Om Prakash Misra Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.
Hon'ble Dinesh Kumar Singh,J.
consider whether the re-examination or examination of any other witness is required for doing the complete justice in the case.
Order Date :- 19.7.2022 Rao/-
Digitally signed by CHEBROLU SRINIVASA RAO Date: 2022.07.19 18:15:51 IST Reason: Location: High Court of Judicature at Allahabad, Lucknow Bench
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the High Court should interfere with the trial court's refusal to recall witnesses examined five years prior to the application.
Whether Section 311 Cr.P.C. creates a vested right for an accused to recall witnesses.
Colour shows how this judgement treated each authority
Amarjeet @ Kalua vs. State of U.P. and othersDistinguished¶6
Amarjeet @ Kalua vs. State of U.P. and others
2 provisions across 1 enactments
Mohammad Akib Khan
State Of U.P.
Dinesh Kumar Singh
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court
