Open iDraf
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

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.

Advocates List

For the Petitioner K.V. Krishnaswami Aiyar, Advocate. For the Crown V.L. Ethiraj, Public Prosecutor.

For Petitioner
  • Shekhar Naphade
  • Mahesh Agrawal
  • Tarun Dua
For Respondent
  • S. Vani
  • B. Sunita Rao
  • Sushil Kumar Pathak

Bench List

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE WALLACE

Eq Citation

81 IND. CAS. 44

AIR 1924 MAD 735

LQ/MadHC/1923/445

HeadNote

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

©2020 - LQ Global Services Private Limited. All rights reserved.