Order 18

Order Details: COPY OF JUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS
Pdf Text: 114 Ct Cases 1579/2023
Gurminder Singh Vs. Ms Nand Kishore Malhotra And Co
04.06.2026
Present : Ms. Prachi Kataria, Ld. counsel for complainant
appeared through VC.
Sh. R S Yadav, Ld. counsel for accused along-with
accused Kamla Kishore Malhotra.
By way of the present order, this Court shall decide an
application moved on behalf of the accused under Section 348 of the
Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 (earlier Section 311
Cr.P.C.) seeking recall of CW-1 Gurminder Singh for further cross-
examination.
It is stated in the application that CW-1 was cross-
examined and discharged on 07.09.2024. It is further averred that
the complainant has filed several other complaint cases against the
accused and certain facts relating to those cases could not be put to
CW-1 during his cross-examination. It is also contended that certain
documents and facts pertaining to the transactions between the
parties are required to be put to the complainant and that further
cross-examination of CW-1 is necessary for the just adjudication of
the present case. It is further stated that no prejudice would be
caused to the complainant if the witness is recalled.
The application was opposed by Ld. Counsel for the
complainant. It is submitted that CW-1 was duly and extensively
cross-examined by the accused and was thereafter discharged. It is
further submitted that the concerned bank witness was examined
separately as CW-2 and the said witness produced the relevant bank
statements and records. It is argued that no new document has been
-- 1 of 3 --
brought on record after the discharge of CW-1 and the present
application has been filed only to delay the proceedings and to fill
up lacunae in the defence. Accordingly, dismissal of the application
has been sought.
Arguments heard. Record perused.
Section 348 BNSS empowers the Court to recall a
witness if such evidence is essential for the just decision of the case.
However, the power cannot be exercised merely to fill omissions or
grant a second opportunity after adequate cross-examination.
The record shows that CW-1 was duly cross-examined
and discharged. No subsequent development or fresh circumstance
has been shown requiring his recall. The plea that questions relating
to other complaint cases could not be put to CW-1 is not persuasive.
The present case concerns a specific transaction and cheque
dishonour. Issues arising in other litigations do not make further
cross-examination necessary for deciding the present complaint.
The accused has also referred to certain documents and
transactions. However, CW-1 has already been cross-examined, and
CW-2 produced the relevant bank records. No new document has
been brought on record after the discharge of CW-1 warranting
recall.
The accused remains free to lead defence evidence and
rely upon documents in accordance with law. Therefore, no
prejudice is caused by declining recall.
The application does not disclose any circumstance
showing that further examination of CW-1 is essential for a just
decision. Rather, it seeks to reopen a concluded cross-examination.
-- 2 of 3 --
The power under Section 348 BNSS is meant to aid the Court in
arriving at the truth and not to provide repeated opportunities. In the
absence of any compelling reason, recall would only delay the
proceedings.
In view of the above, this Court is of the opinion that
the accused has failed to establish that recall of CW-1 is essential for
the just decision of the case. No sufficient ground is made out for
exercise of powers under Section 348 BNSS.
Accordingly, the present application under Section 348
BNSS, 2023 is dismissed.
List for statement of accused u/s 313 Cr.P.C on
28.09.2026.
Accused is directed to be present in person on NDOH.
(Siddhant Kumar)
JMFC (NI Act)-05/PHC/NDD
04.06.2026
-- 3 of 3 --