Right to Cross-Examination Cannot Be Curtained Abruptly: Punjab & Haryana HC Grants One Final Opportunity in Majithia Defamation Case

Case Name: Sanjay Singh v. Bikram Singh Majithia

Date of Judgment: 27.03.2026

Citation: CRM-M-11055-2021

Bench: Hon’ble Mr. Justice Tribhuvan Dahiya

Held: The High Court held that while trial courts can regulate proceedings for expeditious disposal, the valuable right of cross-examination cannot be curtailed abruptly. Denial of adequate opportunity to cross-examine a witness causes prejudice and violates principles of fair trial.

Summary: The petition was filed under Section 482 Cr.P.C. challenging the trial Court’s order declining the petitioner’s request to summon a judicial file and abruptly closing the cross-examination of the complainant in a criminal defamation case.

The petitioner had sought to summon the judicial record of a case pending before the Special Judge, CBI, Mohali, to confront the complainant with a statement made before the Enforcement Directorate. The trial Court rejected this request on the ground that the petitioner could obtain certified copies and lead such evidence in defence.

The High Court upheld this part of the order, observing that there was no illegality in declining the summoning of the judicial file, especially when alternative remedies were available.

However, the Court found fault with the trial Court’s decision to abruptly close the cross-examination of the complainant. The record revealed that the complainant had been examined on multiple dates, and the cross-examination remained incomplete due to intervening circumstances.

The Court noted that although there is an obligation to expedite trials, particularly those involving public representatives, such urgency cannot override the accused’s right to effectively cross-examine the complainant. It further observed that delay in trial was not attributable to the petitioner, and denial of further opportunity would cause serious prejudice.

Decision: The High Court partly allowed the petition and held that:

• Rejection of application to summon judicial file is valid.
• Closure of cross-examination was unjustified.
• The petitioner must be granted one effective opportunity to complete cross-examination of the complainant.

The impugned order was set aside to the limited extent of denying further cross-examination, and directions were issued to allow one final opportunity.