FAZAL KHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This is a petition under Section 482 Cr.P.C. against the order dated 20.9.2012 by virtue of which the application of the petitioner u/S 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling certain witnesses was rejected.

(2.) I have heard Mr.Singh, learned counsel for the petitioner as well as learned APP for the State.

(3.) Mr.Singh, has contended that examination of the defence witnesses namely Fazru Nambardar, Kamruddin, Imam and Jamshed whose names were given in the application filed by the petitioner under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is very essential for the defence of the accused. It was contended by the learned counsel that no doubt in the statement recorded under Section 313 Cr.P.C., the accused had stated that he does not want to examine any defence witnesses but this statement was made when the proxy counsel for the accused was present. It was stated that this statement of the accused should not be taken to his detriment and he may be permitted to examine the defence witnesses. So far as the relevance of the defence witnesses is concerned, it was contended that these witnesses belonged to the Village of the petitioner, who will testify that the petitioner was not present at the place of incidence and he had been picked up from his Village after the incidence. The petitioner in this regard has drawn the attention of the Court to the judgment of the Apex Court in case titled P.Sanjeeva Rao Vs. State of A.P., 2012 AIR(SC) 2242 to contend that the witnesses in the said case were called for the purpose of cross examination on the ground that the object of Section 311 Cr.P.C. was to prevent the failure of justice on account of mistake of either party to bring on record the valuable evidence or to clear any ambiguity in the statement of the witnesses.