Anantnag court denies plea to recall witnesses in 2020 murder case

Anantnag, Jun 1: A local court on Saturday denied a defense plea to recall four prosecution witnesses in a high-profile 2020 murder case, citing concerns over judicial efficiency and the dignity of victims. Principal Sessions Judge Tahir Khurshid Raina dismissed the application filed under Section 311 of the Criminal Procedure Code (corresponding to Section 348 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita), stating the defense was attempting to reopen the case unnecessarily. “If it is allowed, it simply means the trial has become hostage to the changing choice of counsels of the accused,” Judge said. “New counsel, new questions, and new cross-examination. Is this a trial or an investigation being conducted at will?”

The case involves FIR No. 94/2020, registered at Police Station Kokernag, in which 14 people — including Ashraf Sheikh — are charged with murder, attempted murder, criminal conspiracy, and other offenses under the Indian Penal Code (IPC). The daylight killing had sparked outrage across Kashmir.

Prosecution evidence concluded on November 7, 2024. The defense was due to present its case but instead filed the recall application on April 10, 2025, citing “material questions” omitted during initial cross-examinations. The public prosecutor opposed the plea, arguing the witnesses had already been thoroughly examined and the defense was merely trying to delay proceedings. Judge emphasized that while Section 311 allows recall of witnesses to ensure justice, it cannot be used to rectify strategic errors. He noted the original cross-examination was conducted by a senior, highly competent former judicial officer. “The trial cannot become an endless cycle where every new counsel restarts the cross-examination to suit their own style. This would turn the trial into a farce,” the court said. The judge also noted that two of the witnesses were close relatives of the victim. “Recalling such witnesses after five years would amount to harassment and force them to relive their trauma — merely to satisfy the defense’s change in strategy,” he said.

The court concluded by warning against misuse of legal provisions in the name of a fair trial. “Justice must be fair to all stakeholders — not just the accused,” Judge said. “Courts must shield the process from abuse, delay, and emotional injury to victims.”