311 cr pc
Om Prakash Dhusia
(Querist) 20 December 2012
This query is : Resolved
The prosecution witness (PW) was cross-examined in the year 2005 by the defense and he was not treated hostile though had spoken entirely contrary to the prosecutions. The new defense counsel in the year 2011 had requested the Trial Court to recall the same PW under section 311 Cr PC subjectively for the ‘panchnama’of the skull. But that PW was subjected to first chief-examination on the ‘panchnama’ of the skull and then cross-examined by the defense. Was this in accordance with section 137 Evidence act? If not was the trial vitiated or improper and prejudiced caused to the accused? Kindly reply.
Raj Kumar Makkad
(Expert) 20 December 2012
Yes. This process of asking the previous evidence from the re-called witness has surely prejudiced to the accused and thus his evidence controverting his previous evidence cannot be taken into consideration.
Om Prakash Dhusia
(Querist) 21 December 2012
Thanks Mr. Raj Kumar Makkad for the fastest reply.
Regards
