VIVEK AGARWAL, AVANINDRA KUMAR SINGH
Lakhan Singh Thakur – Appellant
Versus
State of M. P. – Respondent
ORDER
Agarwal, J:-- 1. Petitioner is aggrieved of the order dated 4.12.2024 passed by the learned First Additional Session Judge/Special Judge (Prevention of Corruption Act), Katni whereby learned trial Court closed the right of the petitioner to cross-examine the witness Krishnakant, taking this fact into consideration that before lunch Shri Manu Tiwari had started crossexamination of this witness Krishnakant and post lunch he did not appear, therefore, right to cross-examination has been closed. It is noted by the learned trial Court that on previous dates i.e. 3.7.2024 witness Krishnakant was present but adjournment was sought on account of health grounds of the father of the counsel, which was given at a cost of Rs.1000/- (Rupees One Thousand Only). On 29.7.2024, witness was present but time was sought on the ground that Manu Tiwari was busy in High Court, then again time was granted. Then on 10.9.2024, witness Krishnakant was present but Manu Tiwari had sought time to cross-examination, which was granted at a cost of Rs.1000/-(Rupees One Thousand Only). Thereafter, matter was taken up on 4.12.2024, witness was present, cross-examination began at 12.30 PM, it was closed due to
The court affirmed the essential right to cross-examine witnesses fully, emphasizing no counsel should be compelled to conclude cross-examination in one sitting without justified reasons.
The court emphasized the importance of providing a fair opportunity for cross-examination and ensuring expeditious disposal of the trial.
The accused's repeated absences and conduct justified the trial Court's decision to close the right to cross-examine the complainant.
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.