Crl. Misc. No. M-684 of 2010 1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Crl. Misc. No. M-684 of 2010 DATE OF DECISION: January 12, 2010 Ajaib Singh .........PETITIONER(S) VERSUS State of Punjab and another ......RESPONDENT(S) CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAI LAMBA Present: Mr. Padamkant Dwivedi, Advocate, for the petitioner. AJAI LAMBA, J. (ORAL) This petition is directed against order Annexure P-6 dated 02.12.2009 vide which application for recalling complainant Ajaib Singh for reexamination has been dismissed. The reasons assigned by the Trial Court for dismissing the application are contained in para no. 5 of the impugned order Annexure P-6 and are to the following effect:- (a) That the charge had been framed on 30.08.2006 whereafter prosecution examined number of witnesses including PW Ajaib Singh. The examination-in-chief of Ajaib Singh was concluded on 27.04.2007 and the cross-examination was concluded on 26.09.2007. (b) The prosecutor appearing for the State had earlier filed an application for recalling PW Ajaib Singh and for reexamination on Crl. Misc. No. M-684 of 2010 2 14.12.2007. The application, however, was not pressed for reasons best known to the prosecution. (c ) All the witnesses have already been examined and after cross-examination have been discharged. (d) The ground assigned for recalling PW Ajaib Singh is that he had taken a different stand in cross-examination. The Trial Court has concluded that simply because a witness takes a different stand in cross- examination, it would be a ground per se for recalling the witness for reexamination. This Court is in agreement with the reasons assigned for dismissing the application. No ground for interference under Section 482 Cr.P.C. is made out. It is for the witness to give his statement and re- examination of that witness cannot be allowed only because she/he does not give statement as is convenient to the prosecution. Opportunity to examine a witness is required to be given, which would include cross-examination of the witness. It is not in dispute that opportunity has been given to examine and cross-examine the witness, in accordance with law. Dismissed. 12.01.2010 (AJAI LAMBA) shivani JUDGE