TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 102X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... However, the said request made by the petitioner was rejected by the respondent, since they are not going to rely upon the statement of the said officers and they are intend to initiate the proceedings afresh. In such view of the matter, the question of cross-examination would not arise. Further, the cross-examination of the said officers is necessary only when their statements are against the petitioner. In the present case, the statements of the said officers are said to have in favour of the petitioner and hence, there is no necessity of cross-examination those officers. That apart, it is up to the respondent to rely on the statements of the said officers or not. In such case, since the respondent is not at all going to rely upon the st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner. However, the said request was refused by the respondent vide the impugned communication dated 30.09.2023. Hence, the present writ petition. 4. In reply, the learned counsel for the respondent would submit that after taking into consideration of the said request of the petitioner to cross-examine their own officers, the same was refused by the respondent for a reason that they are not going to rely upon the statements of the said officers and they are going to initiate the proceedings afresh. 5. In response to the above submission, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that since the statements of the aforesaid officers, who are all sought to be cross-examined, are in favour of the petitioner, the respondents are not inte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ross-examination. The relevant portion of the said judgement reads as follows: 27. In K.L. Tripathi v. State Bank of India Ors., AIR 1984 SC 273, this Court held that, in order to sustain a complaint of the violation of the principles of natural justice on the ground of absence of opportunity of cross-examination, it must be established that some prejudice has been caused to the appellant by the procedure followed. A party, who does not want to controvert the veracity of the evidence on record, or of the testimony gathered behind his back, cannot expect to succeed in any subsequent grievance raised by him, stating that no opportunity of cross-examination was provided to him, specially when the same was not requested, and there was no disput ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
