JAGDISH PARDESHI RATHOR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned Counsel for the petitioner and respondent no.1. Considering the controversy involved, notice to respondent no.2 is dispensed with. With consent of the learned Counsel present for the parties, the matter is taken up for final disposal by issuing Rule, making the same returnable forthwith.

(2.) The petition raises a challenge to the rejection of application for recall of witness by the trial Court vide order dtd. 18/5/2022. It is argued by the learned Counsel for the petitioner that the petitioner, facing trial under Special Act has moved an application (Exh.37) seeking recall of P.W.1 - mother of the victim under Sec. 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure.

(3.) It is further argued that though the mother of the victim [informant] was cross-examined, however as the copy of statement recorded under Sec. 164 of the Code was not made available on the same date, certain contradictions have not been brought on record. It is the submission that due to belated disclosure of 164 statement, the petitioner did not get proper opportunity to consider the same and put it to the witness to prove contradictions.