vss IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION WRIT PETITION NO.2217 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO.2217 OF 2007 WRIT PETITION NO.2217 OF 2007 Santosh Laxman Kawade ... Petitioner V/s. M/s.Hindavi Finance Ltd. & Anr. ... Respondents Mr.A.A. Joshi for Petitioner Mr.S.S. Aradhye for Respondent No.1 Mr.D.P. Adsule, APP, for State CORAM: SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA SMT.NISHITA MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. MHATRE, J. DATED: JUNE 23, 2008 JUNE 23, 2008 JUNE 23, 2008 P.C.: P.C.: P.C.: . The petition has been filed challenging the order passed on 1.10.2007 by the JMFC, Pandhapur in STC No.2018 of 2005 allowing the recall of the witnesses for further cross-examination by the complainant. This order has been passed on an application filed on 6.7.2007 by the complainant for recalling certain witnesses. The application was filed after the case was closed for arguments. 2. However, a perusal of the order passed by the JMFC indicates that he has not given any reasons for allowing the application made by the complainant. Section 311 of the Cr.P.C. stipulates that the Court may at any stage of enquiry, trial or other proceedings summon a person as a witness to be examined or recall : 2 : and reexamine any person already examined. The Court may summon and examine or recall and reexamine any person if it appears to the Court that his evidence is essential for a just decision in the case. The cryptic order of the JMFC does not disclose the reasons for recalling the witness nor does it disclose the satisfaction of the Court for recalling the witnesses for re-examination. 2. In this view of the matter, the order dated 1.10.2007 is set aside. The JMFC, Pandharpur to decide the application No.67 of 2007 filed by the complainant afresh. While doing so, the trial Court shall give reasons for deciding the application so that a judicial review of that order, if necessary, is possible. 3. Writ petition is disposed of accordingly.