In Brief
A criminal trial dating from 1983 involved the repeated failure of the prosecution to produce handwriting expert witness H.S. Tuteja despite initial summoning in 2004. Over thirteen years, the prosecution filed multiple applications to summon him, all granted, yet failed to produce him. Despite High Court warnings and explicit directions to proceed without further adjournment, the trial court continued allowing fresh applications. The Supreme Court held that Section 311 CrPC's power to summon witnesses must be exercised cautiously and only for strong reasons. When prosecution evidence has closed and non-examination reasons are unsatisfactory, belated summoning prejudices the accused and amounts to abuse of process. The appeal was allowed and the orders quashed.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.