Madhya Pradesh High Court
Shubham vs State Of M.P. on 24 November, 2021
Author: Vivek Rusia
1 CRR-1532-2021
The High Court Of Madhya Pradesh
CRR No. 1532 of 2021
1. SHUBHAM CHOUHAN S/O SANTOSH CHOUHAN
2. SHAILENDRA @ [email protected] SHELU S/O KAMAL KISHORE SHARMA
3. MAYANK SHARMA S/O KAMAL KISHORE SHARMA
VS.
STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH THROUGH POLICE STATION CIVIL LINE,
DEWAS, DISTRICT-DEWAS.
6
Indore, Dated : 24-11-2021
Shri Nitin Singh Bhati, learned counsel for the petitioners.
Shri Chetan Jain, learned Panel lawyer for the respondent-State.
Petitioners have filed the present criminal revision being aggrieved by
the order dated 23/03/2021 whereby the learned trial Court has dismissed the
application filed by the petitioners under Section 311 of Cr.P.C.
The petitioners are the accused and facing trial for the offence
punishable under Sections 147, 148, 149, 307, 302, 294 and 324 of IPC.
Initially, they were provided a counsel by the district legal services authority.
The prosecution has examined 10 witnesses and all of them were cross-
examined by counsel for the respective accused. After cross-examination of
the aforesaid 10 witnesses, petitioners have engaged another counsel in place
of counsel provided by the district legal services authority. The new counsel
found that in the cross-examination, various important questions have not
been put and there was no effective cross-examination and therefore, he filed
an application under Section 311 of Cr.P.C. for recalling prosecution
witnesses PW-5, PW-6, PW-7 and PW-8 for further cross-examination on
the ground of fair trial. The learned trial Court rejected the said application,
hence present revision has been filed.
Learned counsel for the petitioners submits that every accused has a
right to get fair trial. Although he is not alleging that the earlier counsel was
not competent but, there are certain important points which the prosecution
witnesses were not confronted with. Hence, an opportunity may be given to
recall the aforesaid witnesses.
It is settled law that scope of Section 311 of Cr.P.C. is very limited, in
2 CRR-1532-2021
which the Court is only having the power to recall the witnesses, however, in
certain circumstances, the Court can recall the witnesses on the request of the
parties, but in the present case, the reason for recalling the witnesses is only
change of counsel, which is not permissible within the scope of Section 311
of Cr.P.C. The learned trial Court has reliance upon the judgment of the
Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Rajaram Prasad Yadav Vs. State of
Bihar and Others reported in AIR 2013 SC 3081.
In view of the above, I do not find any illegality and infirmity in the
impugned order.
The revision is accordingly dismissed.
(VIVEK RUSIA)
JUDGE
vc
Digitally signed by VARSHA CHATURVEDI
VARSHA
DN: c=IN, o=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
INDORE, ou=HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH BENCH
INDORE, postalCode=452001, st=Madhya Pradesh,
2.5.4.20=df59fbf0f5c7485addc8affe3edf20e67d11d7f91045d81
139f6792fbd4ae91f,
CHATURVEDI
pseudonym=F29DF1B77616273C6A0CF86F33868DF0D9382C3
0,
serialNumber=652FE82BC5CAE8153A1E34C3B8EFC095F5A0D1
44B089415F31342D1C8E2D3139, cn=VARSHA CHATURVEDI
Date: 2021.11.25 12:50:40 +05'30'
