IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH CRM No.M-20179 of 2009 (O&M) Date of Decision : 13.07.2011 Shivraj Masih ... Petitioner versus State of Punjab & another ... Respondents CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MAHESH GROVER Present: Mr. Sunil Agnihotri, Advocate for the petitioner. Mr. Gaurav Garg Dhuriwala, DAG, Punjab. Mr. R.K.Bansal, Advocate for respondent No.2. **** Mahesh Grover, J. (Oral) This petition impugns the order dated 13.03.2009 whereby the trial court refused to invoke Section 311 Cr.PC on the application filed by the petitioner to cross-examine the witness PW-1 Fateh Chand Sharma. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that on one occasion his counsel was unwell and that is the reason he could not examine the said witness and thus, in view of the specific plea taken, to establish interpolation, the petitioner should be granted an opportunity to examine the witness PW-1 Fateh Chand Sharma. The prayer has been opposed by the counsel for the respondent. He further submits that the petitioner was granted an opportunity to cross-examine the witness but did not do so and thereafter he did not examine the witness even though he was present in Court and therefore the present application, which was moved before the trial court upon which the impugned order was passed does not CRM No.M-20179 of 2009 (O&M) -2- deserve to be allowed. I have considered the matter on the respective assertion and counter assertion made by the respective parties. Section 311 of Cr.P.C. gives power to the court to pass any appropriate order for summoning any material witness or examine any person at any stage of the inquiry, trial or other proceedings if such evidence appears to be essential for the just decision of the case. Section 311 Cr.PC reads as under: “311. Power to summon material witness, or examine person present - Any court may, at any stage of any inquiry, trial or other proceeding under this code, summon any person as a witness, or examine any person in attendance, though not summoned as a witness, or recall and re-examine any person already examined; and the court shall summon and examine or recall and re-examine any such person if his evidence appears to it to be essential to the just decision of the case.” The language of the aforesaid section therefore lays emphasis on “just decision”. In the considered opinion of this Court, the facts do not reveal any undue laxity which could not have been condoned by the Court in the given set of circumstances, if such an indulgence was to be shown against the principle of ensuring a just decision of the case. Consequently, the impugned order is set aside and the matter is remitted back to the learned trial court which shall permit the petitioner to cross-examine the said witness – Fateh Chand Sharma by giving only one effective opportunity to him. It is made clear that no further opportunity shall be given to the petitioner under any circumstances. He shall also deposit a cost of Rs.5,000/-, which shall CRM No.M-20179 of 2009 (O&M) -3- be disbursed to the said witness. Disposed of. July 13, 2011 (Mahesh Grover) sonia Judge