{"id":220994,"date":"2019-10-18T09:30:43","date_gmt":"2019-10-18T04:00:43","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=220994"},"modified":"2019-10-25T11:09:58","modified_gmt":"2019-10-25T05:39:58","slug":"bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/","title":{"rendered":"Bom HC | Delay in applying for summoning witness can’t be termed as ‘lacuna’ in defence; hearsay evidence can’t be made admissible by exhibiting in circuitous way"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court: <\/strong>A.M. Badar, J., allowed a petition filed against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge whereby the application filed by the accused-petitioners for issuing summons to a witness for adducing evidence was rejected.<\/p>\n

The petitioners, husband and in-laws of the complainant, were accused of offences punishable under Sections 498-A, 323, 504, 376, 109 read with 34 IPC. The complainant had alleged that the petitioners subjected her to cruelty and that her father-in-law committed rape on her on multiple occasions. After the conclusion of prosecution arguments, the petitioners moved an application before the trial court invoking its powers under Section 311 IPC for summoning one Dr D.C. Patil or his representative. It was contended that evidence of Dr D.C. Patil was essential for a just decision of the case, as the complainant got herself examined by the said doctor often, and on few occasions even on dates when the commission of rape is alleged. The application was, however, rejected by the trial court noting that it was filed at a belated stage only to fill lacunae in the defence case.<\/p>\n

The High Court, at the outside, observed that the power of the court to summon a material witness has vast amplitude. For understanding the purport of the term “lacunae”, the Court relied on\u00a0Rajendraprasad v. Narcotic Cell,\u00a0<\/em>(1999) 6 SCC 110<\/a>. Relying on the discussion of the Supreme Court in the said case, the High Court observed:\u00a0“Delay in applying for summoning the defence witness cannot be termed as ‘lacuna’ in the defence.”\u00a0<\/strong>It was noted that the petitioners were pressing for Dr Patil’s examination disclosed the fact of an alleged rape to the doctor she was visiting regularly.<\/p>\n

It was further noted that the trial court took noted the fact the complainant denied the prescription issued by Dr Patil after examining her. However, the trial took a shortcut by holding that the said prescription can bean exhibit for the purpose of identification and, therefore, it is not necessary to examine Dr Patil. The Court was of the view that the trial court erred in holding that by marking the prescriptions as exhibits for the purpose of identification, the purpose is served. It was observed: “Merely placing the document in original for the perusal of the court would not be adequate to prove the event embodied within the contents of such document. For proving the contents of those documents, a witness to the execution of the document is required to be examined. The document is required to be proved by examining the author thereof — trial court cannot look into such hearsay evidence by making it admissible in a circuitous way, by exhibiting the same.”<\/strong><\/p>\n

It was held that the petitioners had made out a case of summoning Dr Patil, as his evidence is necessary for a just decision of the case. the petition was allowed and the impugned order was set aside. [Khajasab Suleiman v. State of Maharashtra, \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a0 \u00a02019 SCC OnLine Bom 2919<\/a>,\u00a0<\/b>decided on 16-10-2019]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Bombay High Court: A.M. Badar, J., allowed a petition filed against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge whereby the application filed <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":8808,"featured_media":74381,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[37973,2572,37082],"class_list":["post-220994","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-lacuna-in-defence","tag-Rape","tag-summon-witness"],"yoast_head":"\nBom HC | Delay in applying for summoning witness can't be termed as 'lacuna' in defence; hearsay evidence can't be made admissible by exhibiting in circuitous way | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Bom HC | Delay in applying for summoning witness can't be termed as 'lacuna' in defence; hearsay evidence can't be made admissible by exhibiting in circuitous way\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court: A.M. Badar, J., allowed a petition filed against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge whereby the application filed\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"SCC Times\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-10-18T04:00:43+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-10-25T05:39:58+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1331\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Bhumika Indulia\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"2 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/\",\"name\":\"Bom HC | Delay in applying for summoning witness can't be termed as 'lacuna' in defence; hearsay evidence can't be made admissible by exhibiting in circuitous way | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-10-18T04:00:43+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-10-25T05:39:58+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg\",\"width\":1331,\"height\":887},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Bom HC | Delay in applying for summoning witness can’t be termed as ‘lacuna’ in defence; hearsay evidence can’t be made admissible by exhibiting in circuitous way\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\",\"name\":\"SCC Times\",\"description\":\"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a\",\"name\":\"Bhumika Indulia\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg\",\"caption\":\"Bhumika Indulia\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Bom HC | Delay in applying for summoning witness can't be termed as 'lacuna' in defence; hearsay evidence can't be made admissible by exhibiting in circuitous way | SCC Times","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Bom HC | Delay in applying for summoning witness can't be termed as 'lacuna' in defence; hearsay evidence can't be made admissible by exhibiting in circuitous way","og_description":"Bombay High Court: A.M. Badar, J., allowed a petition filed against the order of the Additional Sessions Judge whereby the application filed","og_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2019-10-18T04:00:43+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-10-25T05:39:58+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1331,"height":887,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Bhumika Indulia","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Bhumika Indulia","Est. reading time":"2 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/","name":"Bom HC | Delay in applying for summoning witness can't be termed as 'lacuna' in defence; hearsay evidence can't be made admissible by exhibiting in circuitous way | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","datePublished":"2019-10-18T04:00:43+00:00","dateModified":"2019-10-25T05:39:58+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","width":1331,"height":887},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2019\/10\/18\/bom-hc-delay-in-applying-for-summoning-witness-cant-be-termed-as-lacuna-in-defence-hearsay-evidence-cant-be-made-admissible-by-exhibiting-in-circuitous-way\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Bom HC | Delay in applying for summoning witness can’t be termed as ‘lacuna’ in defence; hearsay evidence can’t be made admissible by exhibiting in circuitous way"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/","name":"SCC Times","description":"Bringing you the Best Analytical Legal News","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/919ec47cc1b871b362af05740398033a","name":"Bhumika Indulia","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/Me-150x150.jpg","caption":"Bhumika Indulia"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/editor_1\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":326149,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/07\/09\/recall-of-witness-for-production-original-documents-not-amount-to-filling-up-lacuna-in-evidence-discovered-on-cross-examination\/","url_meta":{"origin":220994,"position":0},"title":"Recall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay High Court","author":"Simranjeet","date":"July 9, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court noted that though a witness was mandated to produce original bank documents, he committed a mistake in bringing only photocopies containing endorsement that the same were verified with the original.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Bombay High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":321779,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/05\/09\/gang-rape-accused-granted-bail-improvise-allegations-fir-serious-offences-jk-ladakh-hc-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":220994,"position":1},"title":"J&K and Ladakh HC grants bail to relatives accused of gang rape; Takes note of woman\u2019s tendency to improvise allegations involving her in-laws in heinous offences","author":"Sucheta","date":"May 9, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"The Court noted that the 2nd Respondent did not mention the allegations of gang rape in her written complaint before the Police, however while recording her statement under S. 164, CrPC, she levelled allegations of gang rape on the petitioners for the first time.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Jammu and Kashmir and Ladakh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jammu-and-Kashmir-and-Ladakh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jammu-and-Kashmir-and-Ladakh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jammu-and-Kashmir-and-Ladakh-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Jammu-and-Kashmir-and-Ladakh-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":246224,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2021\/03\/27\/bail-application\/","url_meta":{"origin":220994,"position":2},"title":"Telangana HC | Are principles of res judicata applicable to bail applications? Can repeated filing of bail applications without change in circumstances be accepted? Read on","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"March 27, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"Telangana High Court: G. Sri Devi, J., while addressing a bail application filed in a case of \u2018Honour Killing\u2019 enumerated the factors that are significant while granting bail. Instant criminal petition was filed under Sections 437 and 439 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 seeking to release the petitioners\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":307819,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2023\/11\/28\/andhra-pradesh-hc-sets-aside-conviction-considering-contradictory-evidence-of-witnesses-legal-news\/","url_meta":{"origin":220994,"position":3},"title":"No mandate under CrPC for witness to appear before Court only when summoned; Andhra Pradesh HC sets aside conviction considering contradictory evidence of witnesses","author":"Editor","date":"November 28, 2023","format":false,"excerpt":"\u201cUnless there is any blatant mistake or error on the face of the record which may lead to miscarriage of justice, the Revisional Court shall not exercise its diligence over the matter.\u201d","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"andhra pradesh high court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/andhra-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/andhra-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/andhra-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/04\/andhra-pradesh-high-court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":190414,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/02\/17\/cheques-sent-handwriting-expert-allow-accused-prove-defence\/","url_meta":{"origin":220994,"position":4},"title":"Cheques sent to handwriting expert to allow accused to prove his defence","author":"Saba","date":"February 17, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Orissa High Court: A petition under Section 482 of CrPC was decided by a Single Judge Bench comprising of S.K. Sahoo, J., wherein it was held that in order to provide a better opportunity to the accused to prove his case, it was necessary to send the documents concerned to\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"","width":0,"height":0},"classes":[]},{"id":329589,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2024\/08\/29\/section-311-crpc-based-on-affidavit-filed-after-her-initial-testimony-mp-hc-answers-scc-times\/","url_meta":{"origin":220994,"position":5},"title":"Section 311 CrPC| Can Prosecutrix be recalled for further Cross-Examination based on affidavit filed after her initial testimony? MP High Court answers","author":"Ritu","date":"August 29, 2024","format":false,"excerpt":"Section 311 CrPC allows the court to recall a witness if it is essential for a just decision of the case, but such power must be exercised judiciously and with caution.","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Madhya Pradesh High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/03\/Madhya-Pradesh-High-Court.webp?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220994","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/8808"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=220994"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/220994\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/74381"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=220994"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=220994"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=220994"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}