IMPORTANT POINT
The court emphasized the importance of completing cross-examination within the time frame set by the High Court and allowed two additional days for cross-examination as a special case.

JUDGMENT :

Shampa Sarkar, J.

1. The revisional application arises out of an order dated January 22, 2004 passed by the learned Additional District Judge, 6th Court at Alipore, District 24-Parganas South. By the order impugned, the learned Court allowed an application under Section 114 read with Section 151 of the Code of Civil Procedure, thereby, permitting the opposite party to cross-examine the DW1, i.e., the petitioner herein, for two days. The dates for cross-examination of DW1 as a last, final and special chance, were fixed as February 2, 2024 and February 3, 2024.

2. The opposite party filed a matrimonial suit for a decree of divorce on the grounds stated therein. The petitioner entered appearance and is contesting the suit by filing a written statement. The petitioner also filed a counter-claim for restitution of conjugal rights. The opposite party filed his reply to the counter-claim. Reconciliation failed and evidence commenced.

3. After completion of the evidence of the opposite party, the deposition of the petitioner commenced from April 4, 2023. There were certain disputes with regard to the recording of deposition and the learned trial Judge had directed videography of the cross-examination of the DW1/petitioner, by a professional videographer. Such order was challenged before the High Court in CO No.1644 of 2023. The revisional application was disposed of by this Court, by an order dated June 13, 2023 with the following observations:-

“…The cross-examination of the DW1 shall be concluded within a month from the next date to be fixed by the learned court below. The evidence of the other DWs shall also be recorded in the manner stated hereinabove. It is expected that the evidence of all DWs shall be concluded within the next four months and the suit shall be disposed of within the following six months…’’

4. The cross-examination of DW1 was held between June 19, 2023, to July 18, 2023. The trial Court directed that the cross-examination would continue from July 24, 2023 to July 26, 2023. On July 24, 2023, the petitioner prayed for an adjournment. July 25, 2023 and July 26, 2023 were fixed for further cross-examination. Thereafter, three more days, namely, August 7, 2023, August 8, 2023 and August 9, 2023, were fixed for cross-examination of DW1. On August 7, 2023, the petitioner prayed for an adjournment. On August 9, 2023, the cross-examination of DW1 was deferred and on consent of the parties, three further dates, namely, August 28, 2023, August 29, 2023 and August 30, 2023 were allotted as last chance. The learned Court observed that no further dates would be accommodated in view of the direction of the High Court for completion of the cross-examination of DW1 and the other DWs, within a particular period.

5. In the order dated August 30, 2023, the learned Court had made certain observations with regard to the presence of the personal security guards and third parties in the corridor of the Court room, which had created some commotion and an unwanted situation. The opposite party was cautioned by the Court to stop his people from loitering in the corridor of the outside the Court room. The court’s inspector was directed to provide security to the parties.

6. On August 30, 2023, an adjournment was taken on behalf of the petitioner. The learned Court fixed September 2, 2023 and September 4, 2023.

7. On September 2, 2023, the opposite party appeared before the Court and filed an application, inter alia, stating that the order dated August 30, 2023 would be challenged before the High Court by filing a revisional application. The learned Court adjourned the matter and fixed September 4, 2023 for cross examination of the DW1. On September 4, 2023, cross examination was adjourned and September 13, 2023 was fixed as the next date for hearing of some applications. One such application was seeking recusal of the learned court from the adjudicatory process, filed by the opposite party. The applications were disposed of by order dat