Shahid Roshan Jameer vs State of M.P.

Chandresh Bhushan, J.

Revision is heard finally.

This is a revision against the order dated 21-8-2001 of the III Addl. Sessions Judge, Jabalpur by which the application of the petitioner-accused for re-summoning one Rahim Khan, P.W. 2 for his further cross-examination has been rejected.

The facts in brief, are that the petitioner-accused is being tried on the charge of murder of one Sadik in the Court of III Addl. Sessions Judge, Jabalpur. The prosecution examined one Rahim Khan, P.W. 2 as an eye-witness. Later on 12-7-2001, an application alongwith the Affidavit of P.W. 2, Rahim Khan was filed in the Trial Court, praying that Rahim Khan be summoned for further cross-examination. In this Affidavit, he has averred that in fact he had not seen the incident and what he had stated earlier in the Court was false. This application of the petitioner was rejected by the Trial Court.

The law as laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of Mohd. Husain Umar Kochra etc. Vs. K.S. Dalipsinghji and Another etc., regarding re-calling of witness was that the Court has inherent power to recall a witness, if satisfied that he is prepared to give evidence which is materially different from what he had given at the trial. Learned counsel for the petitioner also placed reliance on the decisions of this Court in Mangital v. State of M.P. [1997 (1) MPWN 138] and Mamingh v. State of M.P. [1999 (2) MPWN 199]. In both these cases, this Court had directed the recall of witnesses, when subsequently, their Affidavits which were contrary to the earlier statements were filed. Thus, in view of the above legal position, it was necessary for the learned Trial Court to recall the P.W. 2, Rahim Khan for further cross-examination, in view of his Affidavit filed by the petitioner. This revision petition, therefore, is allowed. The Trial Court is directed to re-summon P.W. 2, Rahim Khan and permit his further examination and cross-examination.