{"id":326149,"date":"2024-07-09T18:00:21","date_gmt":"2024-07-09T12:30:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/?p=326149"},"modified":"2024-07-17T14:33:55","modified_gmt":"2024-07-17T09:03:55","slug":"recall-of-witness-for-production-original-documents-not-amount-to-filling-up-lacuna-in-evidence-discovered-on-cross-examination","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"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\/","title":{"rendered":"Recall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay High Court"},"content":{"rendered":"
\n

Bombay High Court:<\/span> Petitioners challenged the order dated 11-03-2020 passed by the Small Causes Court rejecting the application filed for recall of a witness for leading of primary evidence. Sandeep V. Marne, J.<\/span>, opined that recall of the witness for production of original documents would not amount to filling up a lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination. The Court thus disposed of the petition and set aside the impugned orders.<\/p>\n

Petitioners instituted a suit seeking recovery of possession of the suit premises on the grounds of bonafide requirement, non-user, sub-letting, and additions\/alterations. Petitioners submitted that Defendant 4 was residing at an address other than the address of the suit premises. Petitioners attempted to prove the said plea by seeking production of documents from Bank of India relating to Defendant 4. Thus, witness summon was issued to the officer of Bank of India for production of various documents desired by petitioners and in this regard, the Chief Manager of Opera House Branch was examined as a witness (PW-5).<\/p>\n

During the cross-examination of PW5, an objection was raised about marking the photocopies of documents in evidence. The Judge, therefore, proceeded to mark only the account ledger and so far as the account opening form was concerned, the same was marked as ‘Article-P’ and photocopy of the passport was marked as ‘Article-P1’ on the ground that despite availability of original documents, only their photocopies were produced by the witness.<\/p>\n

Petitioners thereafter filed an application seeking recall of PW5 for production of original documents for leading primary evidence, which was rejected by the Small Causes Court by an order dated 11-03-2020. The Small Causes Court held that the photocopy of the passport could not be proved by PW5, and that petitioner would have to follow the required procedure for exhibiting the passport of Defendant 4.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the Small Causes Court had not recorded any observations regarding production of the account opening form, nomination form and Form No. 60 and the order dated 11-03-2020 only referred to a copy of the account ledger already marked in evidence and photocopy of the passport. The Court opined that the Small Causes Court ought to have allowed the application directing the witness concerned to bring original account opening form, nomination form and Form No. 60.<\/p>\n

The Court observed that the Supreme Court in Ram Rati<\/span> v. Mange Ram<\/span>, (2016) 11 SCC 296<\/a> and Vadiraj Naggappa Vernekar<\/span> v. Sharadchandra Prabhakar Gogate<\/span>, (2009) 4 SCC 410<\/a> held that the provisions of Order 18<\/a> Rule 17<\/a> of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908<\/a> (‘CPC’) were to be exercised sparingly and not as a general rule, and thus, opined that recourse to recall of witness under Order 18<\/a> Rule 17<\/a> of the CPC<\/a> should not be adhered to fill-up lacunae in evidence discovered on cross-examination. In the present case, however, PW5 was examined mainly to produce the records available with the Bank. Though he was mandated to produce original documents and he had the original account opening form, nomination form, Form No. 60, he committed a mistake in bringing only photocopies containing endorsement that the same were verified with the original. Thus, recall of the witness for production of the original documents would not amount to filling up a lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination.<\/p>\n

The Court stated that Bank’s witness could not give evidence with regard to the passport as the Bank did not possess the original passport. The Court also stated that it would be open for petitioners to seek production of original passport from Defendant 4 and if he chooses not to produce the same, the Court could always draw adverse inference against him.<\/p>\n

The Court disposed of the petition, set aside the impugned orders, and stated that the Small Causes Court shall issue witness summons to the Branch Manager, Bank of India, Opera House Branch, who shall produce original account opening form, nomination form and Form No. 60 in respect of Defendant 4. If the witness produces the original forms, the Small Causes Court shall verify the same with photocopies already placed on record and mark photocopies as exhibits by returning original forms, after grant of inspection to defendant, to the witness concerned.<\/p>\n

[Aspi Jal v. Ratilal Bhukhabhai Gandhi, 2024 SCC OnLine Bom 2091<\/a>, decided on 05-07-2024<\/span>]<\/p>\n\n

Advocates who appeared in this case :<\/p>\n

For the Petitioners: Jamshed Master i\/b Natasha Bhot.<\/p>\n

For the Respondent: Darshit K. Jain i\/b Divya D. Jain.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

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.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":314919,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[3,10],"tags":[2569,9121,70771,31738,70770,62191],"class_list":["post-326149","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-casebriefs","category-highcourts","tag-Bombay_High_Court","tag-cross-examination","tag-lacuna-in-evidence","tag-order-18-rule-17-cpc","tag-production-of-original-documents","tag-recall-of-witness"],"yoast_head":"\nRecall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay HC | SCC Times<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Bombay High Court held that recall of a witness for production of original documents would not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination.\" \/>\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\/2024\/07\/09\/recall-of-witness-for-production-original-documents-not-amount-to-filling-up-lacuna-in-evidence-discovered-on-cross-examination\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Recall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay High Court\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Bombay High Court held that recall of a witness for production of original documents would not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"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\/\" \/>\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=\"2024-07-09T12:30:21+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2024-07-17T09:03:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"887\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"591\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:title\" content=\"Recall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay High Court\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Simranjeet\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"4 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\/2024\/07\/09\/recall-of-witness-for-production-original-documents-not-amount-to-filling-up-lacuna-in-evidence-discovered-on-cross-examination\/\",\"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\/\",\"name\":\"Recall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay HC | SCC Times\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"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\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"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\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"datePublished\":\"2024-07-09T12:30:21+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2024-07-17T09:03:55+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\"},\"description\":\"Bombay High Court held that recall of a witness for production of original documents would not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"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\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"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\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"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\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp\",\"width\":887,\"height\":591,\"caption\":\"Bombay High Court\"},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"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\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Recall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay High Court\"}]},{\"@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\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd\",\"name\":\"Simranjeet\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"Simranjeet\"},\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Recall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay HC | SCC Times","description":"Bombay High Court held that recall of a witness for production of original documents would not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination.","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\/2024\/07\/09\/recall-of-witness-for-production-original-documents-not-amount-to-filling-up-lacuna-in-evidence-discovered-on-cross-examination\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_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","og_description":"Bombay High Court held that recall of a witness for production of original documents would not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination.","og_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\/","og_site_name":"SCC Times","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/scc.online\/","article_published_time":"2024-07-09T12:30:21+00:00","article_modified_time":"2024-07-17T09:03:55+00:00","og_image":[{"width":887,"height":591,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Simranjeet","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_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","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Simranjeet","Est. reading time":"4 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"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":"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\/","name":"Recall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay HC | SCC Times","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"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\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"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\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","datePublished":"2024-07-09T12:30:21+00:00","dateModified":"2024-07-17T09:03:55+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd"},"description":"Bombay High Court held that recall of a witness for production of original documents would not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"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\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["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\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"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\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","width":887,"height":591,"caption":"Bombay High Court"},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"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\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Recall of witness for production of original documents will not amount to filling up lacuna in evidence discovered on cross-examination: Bombay High Court"}]},{"@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\/aaee99423671d3377042373c5dcdabbd","name":"Simranjeet","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/03d92c7ef8267a8c57730c194d10ea045f0dc6cb00ce27a633a2e25adccce1c9?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"Simranjeet"},"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/author\/scc\/"}]}},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/02\/Bombay-High-Court.webp","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":220994,"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\/","url_meta":{"origin":326149,"position":0},"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","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 18, 2019","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: 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. The petitioners, husband and in-laws of the complainant, were accused of offences punishable under\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":273175,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/09\/06\/tripura-high-court-code-of-criminal-procedure-code-of-criminal-procedure-re-summoning-witness-accused-examination-in-chief-irreparable-lacuna-justice-hostile-witness-legal-research-legal\/","url_meta":{"origin":326149,"position":1},"title":"Tripura High Court | Section 311 CrPC cannot be used to fill up the lacuna but re-examination can be done to meet the ends of justice","author":"Editor","date":"September 6, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"\u00a0 \u00a0 Tripura High Court: In a case relating to a revision petition filed by the State, challenging the order of the Sessions Judge allowing the petition filed by the accused for re-examination of witnesses under Section 311 Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC) at the stage of examination of accused\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Tripura High Court","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/08\/tripura-high-court.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":67861,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2016\/09\/09\/courts-must-strike-balance-between-protecting-rights-of-accused-and-preventing-harassment-of-victims-and-witnesses-due-to-prolonged-trials\/","url_meta":{"origin":326149,"position":2},"title":"Courts must strike balance between protecting rights of accused and preventing harassment of victims and witnesses due to prolonged trials","author":"Saba","date":"September 9, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"Madras High Court: Setting aside the decision of the Court of Special Judge under the Prevention of Corruption Act, refusing the petitioner accused the right to recall an important witness for cross-examination, the Bench of Dr. P. Devadass, J., allowed the petitioners to recall the witness for cross-examination cautioning that\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":204102,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2018\/10\/23\/intendment-of-order-vii-rule-3-a-cpc-explained-litigant-should-not-be-permitted-to-bide-time-and-fill-in-lacuna-by-appearing-in-witness-box-after-examination-of-other-witnesses-bombay-hc\/","url_meta":{"origin":326149,"position":3},"title":"Intendment of Order XVIII Rule 3-A CPC explained \u2013 Litigant should not be permitted to bide time and fill in lacuna by appearing in witness box after examination of other witnesses: Bombay HC","author":"Bhumika Indulia","date":"October 23, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"Bombay High Court: A Single Judge Bench comprising of Rohit B. Deo, J. quashed the order of the trial court whereby plaintiff\u2019s application under Order XVIII Rule 3-A CPC seeking permission to examine his power of attorney (his son) he himself steps into the box. The petitioners were the defendants\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/09\/Bombay-HC.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]},{"id":260380,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2022\/01\/20\/power-under-or-18-r-17-cpc-cannot-be-invoked-to-fill-up-omission-in-the-evidence-already-led-by-a-witness\/","url_meta":{"origin":326149,"position":4},"title":"HP HC | Power under Or. 18 R. 17 CPC cannot be invoked to fill up omission in the evidence already led by a witness","author":"Editor","date":"January 20, 2022","format":false,"excerpt":"Himachal Pradesh High Court: Sandeep Sharma, J., allowed the petition and quashed the impugned order dated 17-07-2017. \u00a0The facts of the case are such that husband filed divorce petition under Section 13 of the Hindu Marriage Act, against the wife on the ground of cruelty. During the pendency of aforesaid\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":158504,"url":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/2017\/09\/22\/power-to-recall-a-witness-cannot-be-invoked-to-fill-up-omission-in-the-evidence-already-led-by-witness\/","url_meta":{"origin":326149,"position":5},"title":"Power to recall a witness cannot be invoked to fill up omission in the evidence already led by witness","author":"Saba","date":"September 22, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"High Court of Himachal Pradesh: While deciding a petition filed under Article 227 of the Constitution challenging the order passed by the learned Civil Judge whereby application filed under Section 151 CPC on behalf of the petitioners-defendants for leading additional evidence was dismissed, a Single Judge Bench of Sandeep Sharma,\u2026","rel":"","context":"In "Case Briefs"","block_context":{"text":"Case Briefs","link":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/post\/category\/casebriefs\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=350%2C200&ssl=1 1x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=525%2C300&ssl=1 1.5x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=700%2C400&ssl=1 2x, https:\/\/i0.wp.com\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/11\/Himachal-HC_1.jpg?resize=1050%2C600&ssl=1 3x"},"classes":[]}],"amp_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/326149","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\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=326149"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/326149\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/314919"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=326149"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=326149"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.scconline.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=326149"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}