In a recent ruling, the Punjab and Haryana High Court has reaffirmed the authority of criminal courts to summon witnesses at any stage of proceedings until the court concludes the case. The decision sheds light on Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC), which empowers courts to call witnesses and examine individuals present during inquiries, trials, or other legal proceedings. Learn how the Punjab and Haryana High Court’s recent ruling affirms judicial discretion under Section 311 of the CrPC regarding witnesses in criminal proceedings. Understand the factors considered and the court’s decision.
Punjab and Haryana High Court Affirms Judicial Discretion Regarding Witnesses in Criminal Proceedings
Judicial Discretion under Section 311 of CrPC
Justice Sumeet Goel emphasized that under Section 311, courts have the discretion to summon the same witness for multiple examinations, exercising caution in such decisions. Furthermore, The court outlined several factors guiding the trial court’s powers under Section 311, emphasizing the importance of evidence essential for a just decision.
The judgment clarified that courts can invoke Section 311 even after cross-examination has been barred, allowing further examination or cross-examination at the prosecution’s or accused’s request. Moreover, the court stressed that summoning witnesses remains within the judicial discretion of criminal courts until the case’s conclusion.
Factors Considered by the Court
Notably, the court highlighted that the exercise of power under Section 311 should be accompanied by clear and logical reasons, aligning with fundamental principles of criminal jurisprudence. The ruling came during a petition hearing under Section 482 of the CrPC, where the petitioner sought to recall a witness for cross-examination.
During the proceedings, the petitioner argued for the witness’s recall, highlighting her crucial role as the complainant in the case. Conversely, the state counsel contended that the accused had sufficient opportunities for cross-examination and sought to delay the trial’s conclusion.
Court’s Decision and Conclusion
The court, after considering the arguments, underscored the right to cross-examine witnesses as an essential aspect of fair trials. It emphasized that Section 311 enables parties to recall witnesses for further examination, provided sufficient cause is shown.
The judgment stressed that each case requires a unique assessment, and no fixed guidelines can dictate the exercise of power under Section 311. In this particular case, the court noted the significance of the witness’s cross-examination, given her role as the complainant and victim.
Consequently, the court granted the petitioner’s plea, directing the trial court to allow cross-examination of the witness, subject to a nominal cost payment to the District Legal Services Authority.
The ruling reaffirms the judiciary’s commitment to fair and thorough criminal proceedings, ensuring the right to examination and cross-examination for all parties involved.
[Case Citation: 2024 LiveLaw (PH) 61]
H.S. Sandhu represented the petitioner, while Adhiraj Singh Thind served as the AAG Punjab. Vikas Gupta acted as the advocate for respondent No.2.
