9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 1708 - HC - CustomsBreach of the principles of natural justice - right of cross-examination of one of the prosecution witnesses denied - Smuggling - cigarette of foreign origin - Held that - The petitioners having put in a request for cross-examination of two witnesses of the prosecution by its writing dated April 25, 2018 and the petitioners admittedly not being granted such opportunity, the impugned order stands vitiated by reason of breach of the principles of natural justice - impugned order is quashed.
Issues: Challenge to an order in original on the ground of breach of natural justice by denying the right of cross-examination to the petitioners.
Analysis: The High Court of Calcutta heard a writ petition challenging an order in original dated May 31, 2018, which was appealable but maintained on the ground of breach of natural justice. The petitioners contended that the adjudicating authority did not grant them the right to cross-examine a prosecution witness despite a written request. The Court noted that the impugned order did not address the request for cross-examination made on April 25, 2018. The Customs authorities argued that the petitioners were attempting to delay proceedings, citing a granted adjournment on April 6, 2018, and a show-cause notice issued on February 13, 2018. The Customs authorities had accused the petitioners of smuggling foreign-origin cigarettes into India, relying on the statement of a witness named Ravinder Kapoor. The petitioners also sought to cross-examine another prosecution witness, Tapan Ghosh. The Court emphasized the importance of natural justice in adversarial litigation, stating that the delinquent party should be allowed to cross-examine witnesses presented by the prosecution. Since the petitioners' request for cross-examination was not considered by the adjudicating authority, the Court found a breach of natural justice, leading to the impugned order being quashed. The Court directed the adjudicating authority to proceed afresh from the stage reached on April 25, 2018, or as deemed appropriate, ensuring the petitioners' right to cross-examine witnesses. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, keeping all points raised by the parties open for future consideration.
|
