Find a Lawyer

MUSADIQ HUSSAIN versus STATE

In pursuance of Section 40 Section of the CRPC, the re-examination and re-examination of the prosecution's witnesses, the trial court recorded the evidence of four witnesses, of which four witnesses were examined, before the trial court. Anyone has the option of examining the witness as a witness and testifying again. At any stage of the trial, if it is deemed necessary for a fair trial, the trial court cannot deprive either party of its legal and legitimate defense because the authenticity of the witness must be decided by way of cross examination. Had not filed an FIR in this case. , It is necessary to re-examine, either accidentally or deliberately, the FIR's author when the court had to do full justice between the parties before passing judgment and as a result of the negligence or negligence or delay of either party. I could conclude the matter, the acquisition of the item should not be obstructed for the purpose of working under Section 4040 Cr CCPC, it was permissible to see this material, not formally admitted in evidence, even if it There is no restriction under the law that exists in a court file record or in a police file or elsewhere that if a witness It is then checked by the Court can not examine it again, if reasonable grounds. Such a witness was not properly considered by the trial court under section 4040cr CCPC for summoning witnesses to withdraw in the interest of justice and the verdict was remanded to the trial court for four witnesses. Was instructed, which requires a re-examination of the tray advocates from Sarai Alamgir lawyer