Upgrad
LCI Learning

Share on Facebook

Share on Twitter

Share on LinkedIn

Share on Email

Share More

RISHI JI   24 March 2022

CRPC 125 Evidance recalling application

Respected sir,

My WIFE Rights of evidance closed due to not appearing court on several dates on Dec 2021 and after dec hearing at Jan wife also not appeared. on Jan hearing Respondent filled His Evidance affidavit after that filling of respondent evidence wife coming in the month of March and file evidance recalling application under section 311 The code of criminal procedure 1973.



Dear experts please advise how to oppose evidance recalling application.
Also share judgements.

👏👏👏👏👏









Respected Experts please adviceed


Learning

 2 Replies

Dr J C Vashista (Advocate)     25 March 2022

Repeated queries as observed from your profile at: https://www.lawyersclubindia.com/profile.asp?member_id=640333

posted a new topic in Forum CRPC 125 Evidance recalling application

posted a new topic in Forum CRPC 125 Evidance recalling application

posted a new topic in Forum speedy trial application in Trial Court or District judge.

posted a new topic in Forum Divorce jurisdiction

posted a new topic in Forum maintenance 125

posted a new topic in Forum CRPC 125 

posted a new topic in Forum Evidence CRPC 125

posted a new topic in Forum Evidence DV

posted a new topic in Forum Evidance Maintenance case 

It is absurd and ridiculous.
 

Palak batra   25 March 2022

Dear Querist,

 

In the Rahul Labroo vs Priya on 24 March, 2015 case, the respondent-wife has filed a petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. for grant of the maintenance. So, certainly her evidence is essential for the just decision of the case. If due to mistake on the part of her counsel, she was not examined-in-chief as per the provisions of the law, her request to recall and examine herself in support of her petition cannot be declined as the recording of her statement is very essential to the just decision of the case, otherwise it will be a failure of justice.

 

In the case of Manish Tandon vs Ankita Bhutani on 23 May, 2017, The petitioner vehemently argues that a second petition under Section 125 Cr.P.C. is not maintainable once the first petition has been dismissed as withdrawn without a specific permission to file afresh. 

 

Regards,

Palak


Leave a reply

Your are not logged in . Please login to post replies

Click here to Login / Register