In Brief
The petitioner, facing trial for murder under Section 302 IPC, sought recall of a prosecution witness who testified in 2014 that the petitioner carried a rifle. In a separate Gangsters Act proceeding in 2021, the same witness gave a contradictory statement claiming the petitioner's face was covered and could not be identified. The trial court rejected the recall application under Section 311 CrPC. The Supreme Court dismissed the SLP, holding that a witness cannot be recalled merely because they gave different statements in unrelated cases after seven years, distinguishing the reliance on Sudevanand v. State CBI, which involved a witness becoming an approver before judicial officers.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.