In Mohanlal Shamji Soni v. Union of India and Anr.
1991CriLJ1521 it was observed that it is a cardinal rule in the law
of evidence that the best available evidence should be brought
before the Court to prove a fact or the points in issue. But it is left
either for the prosecution or for the defence to establish its
respective case by adducing the best available evidence and the
Court is not empowered under the provisions of the Code to
compel either the prosecution or the defence to examine any
particular witness or witnesses on their sides. It is the duty of a
Court not only to do justice but also to ensure that justice is being
done. It was further held that the second part of the Section does
not allow for any discretion but it binds and compels the Court to
take any of the aforementioned two steps if the fresh evidence to
be obtained is essential to the just decision of the case. It was
emphasized that power is circumscribed by the principle that
underlines Section 311 Cr.P.C, namely, evidence to be obtained
should appear to the court essential to a just decision of the case
by getting at the truth by all lawful means. Further, that the power
must be used judicially and not capriciously or arbitrarily. It was
further observed that evidence should not be received as a
disguise for a retrial or to change the nature of the case against
either of the parties and the discretion of the Court must obviously
be dictated by exigency of the situation and fair play and good
sense appear to be the safe guides and that only the requirement of
justice command the examination of any person which would
depend on the facts and circumstances of each case........"