MUKESH SHARMA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Learned Counsel for the petitioner submits that on account of discrepancies in the statement of PW-1 Subham, an application was moved under Section 311 Cr.P.C. seeking recalling of the witness for further cross-examination. The said application has been rejected by the Trial Court.

(2.) Learned Counsel submits that the learned Trial Court has erred in rejecting the application and in the interest of justice with the sole purpose to reach to the correct facts and conclusions, it is necessary that PW-1 Subham be allowed to recall for further cross-examination. In support of his submission, learned Counsel has relied on judgment passed by the Supreme Court reported in (2013) 14 SCC 461-Rajaram Prasad Yadav Vs. State of Bihar and Anr., wherein in para 14, it has been held as under:

(3.) This Court is of the firm view that for the purpose of arriving at the truth of the case, and if Counsel feels that in the circumstances, certain aspects for cross-examinations are required to be conducted of the prosecution witnesses who is important in the trial, one opportunity ought to be given for the said purpose.