9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (6) TMI 873X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nst the order, dated 14.12.2005 and dated 20.6.2008 passed by the Court of the XXVIII Additional City Civil Judge, Bangalore in O.S. No. 15030/04. Both these orders are passed turning down the petitioners' request for permission to cross-examine the co-defendants. W.P. No. 6683/09 is filed by the defendant No. 4 and W.P. No. 9566/08 is filed by the defendant Nos. 1 to 3. To avoid the confusion, the parties are being referred as per their ranks in the Court below. 2. Sri Vishwanath, the learned Counsel for the defendant No. 4 submits that there is conflict of interest between the defendant Nos. 1 to 3 on the one hand and the defendant No. 4 on the other. Therefore, the defendant No. 4 is to be given an opportunity to cross-examine the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne the witness or of rebutting their testimony by other evidence. When a two or more persons are tried on the same indictment and are separately defended any witness called by one of them may be cross-examined on behalf of the others, if he gives any testimony to criminate them. A defendant may cross-examine his co-defendant who gives evidence or any of his co-defendant's witnesses, if his co-defendant's interest is hostile to his own. 4. Sri K. Divakar, the learned Counsel for the defendant Nos. 1 to 3 submits that the plaintiff has filed the suit in collusion with the defendant No. 4. Unless the defendant No. 4 transposes himself as the co-plaintiff, the defendant No. 4 cannot be permitted to cross-examine the defendant Nos. 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... injurious to the co-defendants, they have a right to cross-examine, is accepted. It would be unjust and unsafe not to allow a co-defendant to cross-examine a witness called by one whose case is adverse to his, or who has given evidence against him. 8. It is also beneficial to refer to the decision of Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Sadhu Singh v. Sant Narayan Singh reported in AIR 1978 P H 319, wherein it is held that Section 138 of Evidence Act, 1872 allows the right of cross-examination of a witness to an adverse party. Where the parties arrayed as defendants in a suit have taken contradictory stands on a relevant and material issue, they shall be adversary to each other and are entitled to exercise their right of cross-ex ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
