Source: Supreme Court  

Why in News? 

Recently, the bench of Justices JB Pardiwala and R Mahadevan held Order XVIII Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 (CPC) empowers the court to recall a witness only to seek clarification, not for further examination or cross-examination by parties. 

• The Supreme Court held this in the matter of Shubhkaran Singh v.Abhayraj Singh & Ors. (2025). 

What was the Background of Shubhkaran Singh v.Abhayraj Singh & Ors.(2025) Case ? 

• The petitioner, Shubhkaran Singh, filed a petition under Order XVIII Rule 17 of the Civil Procedure Code, 1908 before the trial court. 
• The petitioner sought to recall certain witnesses for further examination, cross-examination, or re-examination. 
• The trial court rejected the petitioner's application under Order XVIII Rule 17 of the CPC. 
• Aggrieved by the trial court's decision, the petitioner approached the High Court of Madhya Pradesh at Jabalpur by filing Miscellaneous Petition No.7264/2024. 
• The High Court, vide order dated 07th January 2025, dismissed the petition and upheld the trial court's decision. 
• The petitioner thereafter filed Review Petition No.117/2025 before the High Court, which was also rejected vide order dated 27.02.2025. 
• Being dissatisfied with both orders, the petitioner approached the Supreme Court of India by way of Special Leave Petition (Civil) Nos.12012-12013/2025. 
• No offence was alleged in the present matter, as it pertains to a civil proceeding regarding the recall of witnesses under procedural law. 

What were the Court’s Observations? 

• The Supreme Court observed that Order XVIII Rule 17 of the CPC confers power upon courts to recall witnesses, which should be exercised sparingly and only in exceptional cases for removing ambiguities and clarifying statements, not for filling lacunae in a party's case. 
• The Court held that the power to recall and re-examine witnesses is exclusively vested with the court trying the suit, not with the parties, and parties cannot object to questions asked by the court or cross-examine witnesses without the court's permission. 
• The Court emphasized that Order XVIII Rule 17 does not authorize parties to recall witnesses for examining, cross-examining, or re-examining them at their instance. 
• The Court noted that parties may seek to recall witnesses only by invoking the court's inherent jurisdiction under Section 151 of the CPC if circumstances warrant such action. 
• Referring to K.K. Velusamy v. N. Palanisamy, the Court reiterated that Order XVIII Rule 17 primarily enables courts to clarify issues by recalling witnesses and is not intended for routine use. 
• The Court observed that misuse of this provision would defeat the purpose of CPC amendments aimed at expediting trials, noting that no offence was alleged in this matter as it pertains to procedural aspects of civil litigation.

What is Order XVIII Rule 17 of the CPC ?

• Order XVIII Rule 17 of the Code of Civil Procedure, 1908 empowers the Court to recall any witness who has been examined at any stage of a suit. 
• The provision vests the Court with the discretionary authority to put such questions to the recalled witness as it deems fit, subject to the law of evidence in force. 
• This power is exercisable by the Court at any stage of the proceedings, including during the stage of writing the judgment. 
• The provision serves as a procedural mechanism to assist the Court in clarifying ambiguities and resolving doubts arising from the evidence already on record. 
• The exercise of power under Order XVIII Rule 17 is judicial in nature and must be exercised in accordance with the established principles of natural justice. 
• The rule operates as an exception to the general rule that once a witness's examination is complete, they cannot be recalled, thereby enabling the Court to elicit further information when necessary for the just determination of the case.