9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 1065X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt of Judicial Magistrate First Class, Gwalior against the petitioner which is pending as Criminal Case No. 10082/2013. The respondent produced himself as P.W.-1 and filed an affidavit under Section 145 of Negotiable Instruments Act as examination-in-chief and exhibited cheque in question as Ex. P-1. The petitioner filed an application under Section 311 of CrPC before the trial Court for summoning the employee of the respondent-bank with documents in his defence. Respondent-bank did not file any reply to the aforesaid application and submitted the arguments orally and prayed for the dismissal of the application under Section 311 of the CrPC filed by the petitioner. After hearing both the parties, the trial Court dismissed the application u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case." 8. The Supreme Court in the case of Rajaram Prasad Yadav vs. State of Bihar (2013) 4 SCC 461 has laid down following principles:- "(a). Whether the court is right in thinking that the new evidence is needed by it? Whether the evidence sought to be led in under Section 311 is noted by the court for a just decision of a case? (b). The exercise of the widest discretionary power under Section 311 CrPC should ensure that the judgment should not be rendered on inchoate, inconclusive and speculative presentation of facts, as thereby the ends of justice would be defeated. (c). If evidence of any witness ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... no party in a trial can be foreclosed from correcting errors and that if proper evidence was not adduced or a relevant material was not brought on record due to any inadvertence, the court should be magnanimous in permitting such mistakes to be rectified. (k). The court should be conscious of the position that after all the trial is basically for the prisoners and the court should afford an opportunity to them in the fairest manner possible. In that parity of reasoning, it would be safe to err in favour of the accused getting an opportunity rather than protecting the prosecution against possible prejudice at the cost of the accused. The court should bear in mind that improper or capricious exercise of such a discretionary power, may lead ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
