VidhiSangh

Supreme Court of India · 15/09/2017

RATANLAL versus PRAHLAD JAT & ORS.

[2017] 8 S.C.R. 682 · 2017 INSC 954

AI-generated headnote. Verify against the judgment before relying on it. Paragraph numbers refer to the judgment.

Summary

Two prosecution witnesses sought re-examination about fourteen months after completed testimony, alleging police pressure and seeking to exonerate accused persons. The Court held that the deceased’s brother could invoke Article 136 and that the unexplained delayed recall lacked justification. It reversed the High Court’s permission and directed the trial court to disregard testimony recorded pursuant to that permission.

Issues

  1. Whether the deceased’s brother could challenge the recall order under Article 136.
  2. Whether unexplained delayed witness applications alleging earlier police pressure justified recall under Section 311.

Provisions considered

Held

Result

Appeal allowed; High Court order set aside. Trial court to disregard the re-examination of PWs 4 and 5 recorded pursuant to that order and proceed with the case. Pending applications disposed of.

Judgment PDF: Supreme Court of India, [2017] 8 S.C.R. 682.