Uber: HC reserves order on witness recall

Yadav, through his lawyer D K Mishra, had sought recall of 28 prosecution witnesses on the ground that the earlier defence counsel was “incompetent” and that he was not given fair opportunity to defend himself.

During the hearing on Wednesday, Mishra conceded that some of the witnesses in the case could be “dropped” and restricted his plea to 13 witnesses, including the victim. Doctors who examined the victim and the accused and the policemen who seized the cab are some of the other witnesses he wants re-examined. Mishra argued that there were “material inconsistencies” in the testimonies of key prosecution witnesses.

Additional Public Prosecutor Siddharth Mahajan opposed the plea, claiming that allowing recall of witnesses would be “tantamount to a retrial” which was not permissible under law.

“Primary aim of this application is to create dilatory tactics and delay the trial,” Mahajan said, adding that the defence counsel, who had conducted the evidence proceedings, had been engaged by Yadav’s family and was one of his choice.

The prosecutor also took exception to the argument questioning the calibre of the defence counsel. “The accused is no novice to crime. He has been implicated in nine other FIRs. If there were questions on the competence of the counsel, then why engage him for the entire trial?” Mahajan said.

The trial court had dismissed Yadav’s plea saying there was no change in circumstances except for a change of counsel, which was no ground to allow the application.