Can’t deny right to cross-examination on mere procedural oversights: HC

The Punjab and Haryana High Court has made it clear that the right to cross-examine a witness is a vital legal safeguard and cannot be denied on mere procedural lapses. The assertion came as Justice Manisha Batra set aside a trial court order closing the complainant’s cross-examination by the petitioner-accused in a cheque bounce case under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act.

Advertisement

“It seems that the petitioner has been careless in the entire process of cross-examining the complainant, but it cannot be forgotten that it is well settled proposition of law that no party should be condemned unheard. The court’s primary duty is to reach as close to the truth as possible by obtaining proper proof of such facts which would lead to a just and correct decision of the case, which cannot be done without giving an opportunity to the petitioner to complete the remaining cross-examination of the complainant,” Justice Batra asserted.

Going into the background of the matter, Justice Batra observed the petitioner was arrayed as accused. Neither the petitioner, nor his counsel, appeared for conducting remaining cross-examination of the respondent – a senior citizen sitting in the court premises since morning.

The petitioner took a specific plea that his counsel could not appear since he was appearing in some other court. The “proxy counsel” requested the court to take up the matter later in the afternoon, but the situation remained the same, resulting in cross-examination’s closure.

“The courts are under legal obligation to make every possible effort, in the given fact situation of each case, to reach the truth so as to enable itself to arrive at a just decision for achieving the laudable object of doing substantial justice between the parties. The petitioner’s conduct is certainly indicative that he has been negligent in pursuing his case. However, the negligence of the petitioner is not of the kind which would leave him with such consequence. Hence, this court is of the considered opinion that the present petition deserves to be allowed,” Justice Batra asserted.

Setting aside the trial court's order, Justice Batra directed the trial Magistrate to give the petitioner a last chance to complete the cross-examination, subject to payment of Rs 10,000 as costs to be handed to the complainant.