CRM No. M-7143 of 2009 1 IN THE HIGH COURT FOR THE STATES OF PUNJAB & HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. CRM No. M-7143 of 2009 (O&M) Date of decision: 24.03.2009 Smt. Kanta and others ...Petitioners Versus State of Punjab ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAJAN GUPTA Present: Mr. JBS Gill, Advocate, for the petitioners. Rajan Gupta, J. The petitioners have assailed the order dated 20th February, 2009, passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur, dismissing his application under Section 311 Cr.P.C. for recalling Dr. Gurpal Kataria, a prosecution witness, for further cross-examination. Learned counsel for the petitioners has submitted that Dr. Gurpal Kataria was required for further cross-examination as certain questions relating to medical jurisprudence were to be put to him. According to the counsel, law is well settled that power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. is to be liberally exercised. Thus, the trial court had wrongly rejected the application for recalling Dr. Gurpal Kataria. I have heard learned counsel for the petitioners. There can be no dispute with the proposition that power under Section 311 Cr.P.C. can be exercised at any stage of the trial for CRM No. M-7143 of 2009 2 examination/re-examination of a witness. The court can summon, recall, examine, or re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to be essential to the just decision of the case. However, in the facts of the present case, it is apparent that Dr. Gurpal Kataria, who stepped in the witness-box as PW2, was examined and cross-examined at length. The trial court, therefore, did not feel any necessity to recall the said doctor for further cross- examination. The trial court also observed that the accused would be at liberty to draw attention of the court to the text-books on Medical Jurisprudence at the stage of arguments. The trial court felt that for this purpose there was no necessity of recalling Dr. Gurpal Kataria and subjecting him to cross-examination. In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am of the considered view that application of the petitioners under Section 311 Cr.P.C. has been rightly rejected by the trial court. It does not appear that recalling and re-examining Dr. Gurpal Kataria would be essential to the just decision of the case, as he has already been examined and cross- examined at length. The only submission of the counsel that certain questions pertaining to medical jurisprudence have to be put to the witness, is without any substance as the trial court has already granted liberty to the accused to refer to such text-books relating to medical jurisprudence at the stage of arguments. Thus, in my considered view, recalling the said witness for cross-examination would serve no purpose except to delay the trial. CRM No. M-7143 of 2009 3 I thus find no ground to interfere in the impugned order passed by Additional Sessions Judge, Hoshiarpur. The petition is hereby dismissed. (RAJAN GUPTA) JUDGE March 24, 2009 'rajpal'