Reporting by : Amit Kashyap.
CIVIL APPEAL NO. 4816 OF 2016
[Arising out of SLP (Civil) No. 13076 of 2007]
Muddasani Venkata Narsaiah
Versus
Muddasani Sarojana
(Reported in 2916(4)PLJR,SC, 227 )
The cross-examination is a matter of substance not of procedure one is required to put one’s own version in cross-examination of opponent.
The effect of non cross-examination is that the statement of witness has not been disputed. The effect of not cross-examining the witnesses has been considered by SC Court in Bhoju Mandal & Ors. v. Debnath Bhagat & Ors. AIR 1963 SC 1906.
SC Court repelled a submission on the ground that same was not put either to the witnesses or suggested before the courts below. Party is required to put his version to the witness. If no such questions are put the court would presume that the witness account has been accepted as held in M/s. Chuni Lal Dwarka Nath v. Hartford Fire Insurance Co. Ltd. & Anr. AIR 1958 Punjab 440.
In Maroti Bansi Teli v.Radhabai w/o Tukaram Kunbi & Ors. AIR 1945 Nagpur 60, it has been laid down that the matters sworn to by one party in the pleadings not challenged either in pleadings or cross-examination by other party must be accepted as fully established. The High Court of Calcutta in A.E.G. Carapiet v. A.Y. Derderian AIR 1961 Cal. 359 has laid down that the party is obliged to put his case in cross-examination of witnesses of opposite party.
The rule of putting one’s version in cross-examination is one of essential justice and not merely technical one.
A Division Bench of Nagpur High Court in Kuwarlal Amritlal v.Rekhlal Koduram & Ors. AIR 1950 Nagpur 83 has laid down that when attestation is not specifically challenged and witness is not cross-examined regarding details of attestation, it is sufficient for him to say that the document was attested. If the other side wants to challenge that statement, it is their duty, quite apart from raising it in the pleadings, to cross-examine the witness along those lines.
A Division Bench of Patna High Court in Karnidan Sarda & Anr. v. Sailaja Kanta Mitra AIR 1940 Patna 683 has laid down that it cannot be too strongly emphasized that the system of administration of justice allows of cross-examination of opposite party’s witnesses for the purpose of testing their evidence, and it must be assumed that when the witnesses were not tested in that way, their evidence is to be ordinarily accepted.
Judgements In Criminal Law 