In this criminal application, the applicant challenged the refusal of the lower court to recall already-examined witnesses. The High Court declined to grant the request, finding no error by the trial judge and noting that the applicant had sufficient opportunity to cross-examine.
null
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.
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY NAGPUR BENCH : NAGPUR
Criminal Application (APL) No.49 of 2015 (Anil Thakur V State of Maharashtra, thr PSO PS Pusad City, DistYavatmal)
Office Notes, Office Memoranda of
Coram, appearances, Court's orders Court's or Judge's orders
or directions and Registrar's orders.
[Shri N.S. Deshpande, Adv for applicant.
Shri Laddhad, APP for respondent]
CORAM: A.B. CHAUDHARI,J.
DATED: 25.06.2015.
Heard the learned Counsel for the
applicant and the learned APP for the State.
The order passed in Special Criminal
Case No.119 of 2009 by the learned Judicial
Magistrate, First Class, Pusad, on 02-12-2014
is under challenge before this Court. The
learned trial judge has refused to allow
recalling of witnesses already examined. The
trial Court has given reasons not to extend
the request for recall. I am inclined to grant
with the reasons given by the learned trial
Judge more particularity on Exhibit 157. That
apart, the applicant had been given sufficient
opportunity to put the questions to the
witnesses. Looking to the old trial which is
pending since long, I do not think the trial
Judge has committed an error in not according
to the request for recall of the witnesses.
Hence, I make the following order :-
2
Order
Criminal Application (APL) No.49 of
2015 is rejected.
JUDGE
Deshmukh
2 issues framed by the court
Whether the learned trial judge erred in refusing to recall witnesses who had already been examined in the cognate trial.
Whether sufficient reasons were required to deny recall of witnesses in an old pending trial.
Anil Thakur
State of Maharashtra
A.B. Chaudhari
As recorded by the court registry
Judgements on the same questions, provisions and authorities, from every court