ORDER : M.B. Shah, J. - Leave granted. 2. The appellant has challenged the order passed by the High Court affirming the order of the Magistrate whereby the Magistrate had rejected an application moved by the appellant for permission to lead additional evidence under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as "the Code"). 3. Nirmala, the daughter of the appellant was married to Respondent 1. The marriage did not prove to be successful. The couple has separated. There are allegations of harassment of the daughter of the appellant for dowry, etc. An FIR was lodged by the appellant on 14-8-1997 against Respondent 1 alleging various offences under Sections 498-A, 506, 406 and 494 Indian Penal Code etc. The FIR contains allegations about the accused having married another girl named Manju during the subsistence of the marriage with Nirmala, daughter of the appellant complainant. It is further alleged that the accused has a child also from the marriage with Manju. No charge appears to have been framed under Section 494 Indian Penal Code although charges have been framed under Sections 498-A, 406, etc. Indian Penal Code. Through his application for permission to lead additional evidence the appellant wanted to produce evidence before the trial Magistrate regarding the alleged second marriage of the accused with Manju and a child having been born from the second marriage. Relying upon Section 311 Criminal Procedure Code the learned counsel for the appellant argued that the said provision permits examination of material witnesses at any stage of enquiry, trial or other proceedings under the Code. This includes power to recall and re-examine any person already examined. There is also power to summon and examine any person whose evidence appears to the court to be essential for the just decision of the case. 4. According to the appellant, the trial court should have permitted additional evidence being led on the point which is very material and germane to the just decision of the case. The learned counsel brought to our notice facts which, according to him, establish that an offence under Section 494 Indian Penal Code is made out. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Our attention has been drawn to Section 311 of the Code. The learned counsel brought to our notice facts which, according to him, establish that an offence under Section 494 Indian Penal Code is made out. We have heard the learned counsel for the parties. Our attention has been drawn to Section 311 of the Code. A plain reading of the section shows that the Magistrate has wide powers regarding examination of material witness during the course of trial at any stage. The only criteria for exercise of this power is that it should appear to the court that the evidence is essential to the just decision of the case. Regarding powers of the court under Section 540 of the Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 (a provision which was in pari materia with the provision contained in Section 311 of the present Code), this Court in Jamatraj Kewalji Govani v. State of Maharashtra, AIR 1968 Supreme Court 178 ; 1968 Cri LJ 231, held that the said section confers very wide powers on the court. There was no limitation regarding exercise of this power except that it should be exercised for a just decision of the case. The provision is intended to be wide in view of the repeated use of the word "any" throughout its length. In our view interest of justice demands that in the facts of the case, the Magistrate should have allowed the additional evidence to be led under Section 311 of the Code as prayed by the appellant. On the basis of the evidence so recorded, the Magistrate might have proceeded to frame a charge under Section 494 Indian Penal Code against the accused if the material on record justified it. 5. In view of the above, this appeal is allowed. The impugned orders of the learned Magistrate dated 19-11-2001 and that of the High Court dated 25-1-2002 are hereby set aside. The learned Magistrate is directed to allow the appellant complainant to lead additional evidence as prayed by him vide his application dated 9-12-2000. On the basis of the evidence on record, the Magistrate may proceed to frame a charge under Section 494 Indian Penal Code if a case for it is made out. The case is remanded to the court concerned for further proceedings in accordance with law and complying with the direction contained in this order. 6. Ordered accordingly. Appeal allowed.