THE HON'BLE MR JUSTICE G.V.SEETHAPATHY CRIMINAL PETITION Nos :10956 of 2009 & 6317 of 2010 DATED:10-12-2010 COMMON ORDER: These petitions are filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. assailing the orders, dated 26-10-2009, in Crl.M.P.Nos.121 of 2009 and 122 of 2009 in S.C.S.T. Sessions Case No.2 of 2008 on the file of the learned Additional District and Sessions Judge-cum-Special Court under the Scheduled Castes & Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act (for brevity, ‘the Act’), Vizianagaram. The said applications filed for reopening of the evidence and for recall of P.W.1 for further evidence pertaining to the caste of the petitioner-A20 and to mark certain documents relating to the conduct of the petitioner- A20, were allowed. 2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Additional Public Prosecutor for the respondents- State. Perused the records. 3. Petitioner-A20 along with others is facing prosecution under Sections 506, 352 r/w 34 IPC and Sections 3 (1) (x) 3 (2) (vii) and 4 of the Act. After framing necessary charges, trial was conducted and recording of evidence was completed and the matter was coming up for examination of the accused under Section 313 Cr.P.C. At that stage, petitioner filed the said petitions to reopen the evidence and recall P.W.1 for the purpose of further examination and marking certain documents. 4. Section 311 Cr.P.C. empowers the Court, at any stage of the trial to summon any person as a witness or examine any person in attendance though not summoned as a witness, or recall and re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to be essential to the just decision of the case. 5. According to the prosecution, the fact as to whether petitioner-A20 belongs to Scheduled Caste community or not is not elicited in the evidence, which is an important fact to be established by the prosecution and therefore, he requires to be examined further. The prosecution also seeks to exhibit certain documents through the evidence of P.W.1. As rightly observed by the trial Court, no prejudice would be caused to the petitioner-A20 if P.W.1 is recalled and further examined inasmuch as the petitioner would be entitled to further cross-examine P.W.1. However, prosecution ought to have furnished the list of documents sought to be marked in the evidence of P.W.1. The trial Court allowed the said applications with an observation that the accused are at liberty to cross- examine the witness without causing prejudice to the rights of the prosecution case on those aspects. When the witness for prosecution is recalled and further examined, the accused are perfectly entitled to further cross-examine the said witness and the rider imposed by the trial Court on the liberty given to the accused to cross-examine P.W.1 is unsustainable. Accordingly, the said observation made by the trial Court towards the end of the impugned order in paragraph No.12 is set aside. The prosecution is permitted to recall P.W.1 and further examine him and mark the documents after giving prior notice to the accused as to the documents that are sought to be produced and the petitioner-A20 will be at liberty to further cross-examine P.W.1. The impugned order is modified accordingly. 6. In the result, Criminal Petitions are disposed of as stated above. _______________________ G.V.SEETHAPATHY,J 10th December, 2010. Note: Furnish C.C. of the order within four days. B/o Tsy