NEERAJ JAINENDRA TRIPATHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) WITH the consent of learned counsel for the parties, the matter is finally heard. By this application, the applicant has challenged the order dated 11.4.2011 passed by the Additional Sessions Judge, Maihar District Satna in ST No.290/2008 by which the application filed by the complainant under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. was allowed and it was directed that witness Asha Tripathi and Investigating Officer B.D.Pandey may be recalled.

(2.) THE brief facts of the case are that a trial was going on against the applicant for commission of offence punishable under Section 302 of IPC. According to the prosecution, one locket of the deceased was seized from the applicant. THE locket was duly identified by witness Asha Tripathi, mother of the deceased in identification arranged by the Sarpanch concerned. Cross examination of witness Asha Tripathi and I.O. B.D. Pandey took place in length. THE case was fixed for judgment and thereafter one Vidhyaram Tripathi-complainant has moved an application under Section 311 of IPC to the effect that locket was not shown to the witnesses in the Court, and therefore witnesses may be recalled. THE learned Additional Sessions Judge after considering the submissions made by learned counsel for the parties, directed to recall the witness Asha Tripathi and IO B.D. Pandey for their re- examination.

(3.) THE provisions of Section 311 of Cr.P.C. cannot be exercised in an arbitrary manner. In the application, the complainant Vidhyaram Tripathi has prayed for recalling of those witnesses, who could identify the locket before the trial Court. Identification was not at all related with the IO B.D.Pandey, and therefore recalling of IO B.D. Pandey was without any basis.