The Karnataka High Court has ruled that Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) cannot be used to fill gaps in a case or merely to recycle appreciation letters, dismissing a victim’s plea to recall a witness in a POCSO trial.
Key Aspects of the Judgment–
Section 311 CrPC Powers: This section gives courts discretionary power to summon or recall witnesses if their evidence is essential for a just decision.
Not for Filling Lacunae: The court emphasized that Section 311 shouldn’t be invoked to fill gaps in prosecution or defense cases.
Essential for Justice: The power under Section 311 is to be exercised when evidence appears essential for a just decision.
POCSO Act Considerations: The ruling considered interplay with Section 33(5) of the POCSO Act, which protects child victims from repeated testimony.
Principles Guiding Section 311 CrPC- Wide Discretion: Courts have broad powers but must exercise them judicially and not capriciously.
Fair Trial: The right to cross-examine witnesses is part of a fair trial, constitutionally protected.
Precedents: Cases like Varsha Garg v. State of Madhya Pradesh and Natasha Singh v. CBI highlight Section 311’s scope.
Implications
The judgment underscores that Section 311 CrPC is a tool for justice, not a means to bolster weak cases, balancing rights of accused and victims.
