2026:HHC:17872 IN THE HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA Cr.MMO No.470 of 2026 Date of Decision: 18.05.2026 _______________________________________________________ Rakesh Narula & others …….Petitioners Versus Central Bureau of Investigation & others … Respondents _______________________________________________________ Coram: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Sandeep Sharma, Judge. Whether approved for reporting? 1 For the Petitioners : Mr. Rajesh Kashyap, Advocate. For the Respondents: Mr. Janesh Mahajan, Advocate. _______________________________________________________ Sandeep Sharma, Judge(oral): Instant petition filed under Section 528 of the Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, lays challenge to order dated 02.05.2026 passed by learned Special Judge (CBI), Shimla, District Shimla, Himachal Pradesh, whereby an application filed under Section 348 of Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita (corresponding to erstwhile Section 311 Cr.P.C) for recalling the prosecution witness came to be dismissed. 2. Having heard learned counsel representing the parties and perused the material available on record vis-à-vis reasoning assigned in the impugned order, this Court finds no illegality or infirmity in the same and as such, no interference is called for. 1Whether the reporters of the local papers may be allowed to see the judgment? 2 2026:HHC:17872 3. Though, this Court finds no merit in the present petition, but even otherwise careful perusal of the pleadings as well as other material adduced on record, clearly reveals that questions sought to be put to PW-13 during further cross-examination of PW-13, if permitted, already stand put by learned counsel representing co- accused No.8, 10 and 11, and as such, no prejudice otherwise can be said to have been caused to the petitioner on account of dismissal of his application. Whatever the petitioner intended to ask PW-13 during further cross-examination, if permitted, already forms part of the cross-examination conducted on behalf of the other accused. 4. Besides above, this Court also finds that report of Government Examiner of Questioned Document has been received, wherein signatures on the sale deed, which are alleged to be forged, have been not opined to be of PW-13. 5. In view of the above, the present petition, being devoid of merit, is accordingly dismissed alongwith pending applications, if any, 6. (Sandeep Sharma), Judge May 18, 2026 (shankar)