No Magistrate or Court can refuse to allow an accused person to cross-examine prosecution witnesses, before charge is framed, and the Magistrates procedure in refusing to allow such cross-examination was most irregular and in contravention of the law. Without going into the larger question whether that procedure has rendered illegal, the charge framed, on evidence so irregularly taken, I consider that the fairest course to the accused is to cancel the charge and direct that the cross-examination of the witnesses be now permitted. I direct accordingly.
Are you looking for a
legal research tool ?
Get Started
Do check other products like LIBIL, a
legal due diligence tool to get a litigation check report and
Case Management tool to monitor and collaborate on cases.
In Re. Muthia Chetty v.
In Re. Muthia Chetty v.
(High Court Of Judicature At Madras)
Criminal Revision No. 636 Of 1923. Criminal Revision No. 506 Of 1923) | 11-12-1923
Advocate List
Bench
- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WALLACE
Eq Citations
- 81 IND. CAS. 44
- AIR 1924 MAD 735
- LQ/MadHC/1923/445
Head Note
Evidence Act, 1972 — S. 311 — Magistrate's refusal to allow cross-examination of witnesses before framing charge, held, illegal and in contravention of law — Charge framed on evidence so irregularly taken, without going into larger question whether it was illegal, was cancelled and cross-examination of witnesses permitted
