Madras High Court rules that denial of opportunity to recall witnesses for cross-examination violates fair trial rights, even if costs remain unpaid. Key implications for criminal defense practice.
The CESTAT holds that failure to permit cross-examination of witnesses whose statements are relied upon violates natural justice, mandating remand under Section 138B of the Customs Act.
Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that curtailment of cross-examination without substantive justification violates fair trial rights under BNSS and constitutional principles.
Madhya Pradesh High Court holds that repeated adjournments to delay cross-examination of a child victim violate POCSO Act's time-bound trial mandate and duty to protect child dignity.
Madras High Court holds that delay in cross-examination does not forfeit the right to examine a witness under Section 311 CrPC; conditional opportunity must be granted.