the Supreme Court of India ruling in Rajaram Prasad Yadav v. State of Bihar & Anr. (2013 AIR SCW 4179, decided 4 July 2013):
Headnotes
Section 311 CrPC – Scope of recall Section 311 CrPC confers widest powers on courts to summon, recall, or re‑examine witnesses at any stage, but exercise must be judicial, cautious, and only when evidence is essential for just decision. (Paras 13–14, 23)
Section 138 Evidence Act – Order of examination Re‑examination must be directed to explanation of matters referred to in cross‑examination; if new matter introduced, adverse party may further cross‑examine. (Para 13)
Principles for exercise of Section 311 Court must consider:
Whether new evidence is needed for just decision.
Power should not be used to fill lacunae.
Recall only if essential to ascertain truth.
Fair trial entails interests of accused, victim, and society. (Paras 14–23)
Case facts – PW‑9’s contradictory testimony PW‑9 initially alleged firearm injury but later testified he fell into latrine pit and was not shot; sons were absent. Subsequent application for re‑examination filed months later. (Paras 4–7, 25–26)
Trial Court vs High Court orders Trial Court rejected recall application with reasons; High Court allowed re‑examination by cryptic order without impleading appellant. SC held High Court erred in interfering. (Paras 3, 11–12, 24)
Fair trial – Liberal approach but limits SC acknowledged fairness requires opportunity to accused, but improper or capricious recall causes prejudice and miscarriage of justice. (Paras 20–23)
Final holding – Recall unjustified SC set aside High Court order; upheld Trial Court’s rejection of recall of PW‑9, as application was belated, intended to overcome earlier testimony, and not essential for just decision. (Paras 24–26)
