Madam/Sir,
I would like to have your kind opinion on this peculiar situation.
That the cross-examination of the complainant/witness in a Domestic Violence matter pending adjudication before a Trial Court in Delhi finally started before after a long span of 5 years.
That after a brief spell of cross-examination the matter was adjourned by the Ld. M.M. with an oral direction to the defense counsel to complete the cross-examination on the next date and no further adjournment/time would be given by the Trial Court for further cross-examination.
Kindly render your valuable advise on the following aspects:
Thanking You,
Regards.
This happens because the advocates do not prepare properly and go on asking question which are no relevant.
In fact by such cross they spoil the case of their own client.
Go and watch such happenings in any court. One among few comes dully prepared anf fires questions with confidence and fluidity and wins even a loosing case just by expert cross.
But why the Ld.MM adjourned the proceedings? Cross examination is an art and not easy to master it. Cross Examination can be completed even by a single question if it hit the desire target.John Henry Wigmore stated: " Cross Examination is the greatest legal engine ever invented for the discovgeery of truth. You can do anything with a bayonet except sit on it.A lawyer can do anything with cross-examination if he is skillful enough not to impale his own cause upon it." Likeise, Magistrates and Judges too should master the art of examination of witnesess, otherwise it will be a dificult journey to reach the truth.
My advocate got me out of cheque bounce case even though there is pressumption in cheque law..
Earlier advocate was asking question in cross which annoyed the court and cross was closed .
My new advocate jointed with an appliction u/s 311 for recall of complainant for cross.The court was not ready but the SC citations of 1991 Mohanlals and recent Natasha singh SC 2013 persuaded the court to recall the complainant.
The cross was lucid fast and tempo was developed step by step. The complainant got confused and contracdicted his own answers and before any body knew what is happening the cross was closed and we won the case.
Few examples of rapid fire cross in this case.
Earlier advocate asked 1) do you maintain accouts reply yes.2) where you had money to give 3) do you file ITR and answers were yes and yes.
New advocate asked have you submitted any accounts answer no.2) Have you stated in complaint when and where you paid money and immediate sub question whether you have submitted that you had so much money at home and and have submitted ITR and accounts showing accused as debtor. answer no, no and no..And have you stated in complaint that when and where the cheque was written answer no.And have you mentioned account no of the accused from which the complaint cheque was given answer no.
There were similar spate of short but pointed questions in rapid fire sequence to confuse the complainant and got our desired answers whiich brough acquittal.
Total likes : 1 times
Congrats Vinod!! For cross examiner, it is always best to confine to leading questions nothing but leading questions only, with non stop firing, with the cross examiner playing the music and the witness singing the song.
cross examination is done to dig the truth through the evidence affidavit in civil matters. In DVC matters also evidence affidavit is accepted by the magistrate. If court gets the necessary input to decide a matter, cross examination can be curtailed. Nonetheless, if you really have good grounds, you can always file application to further reexamine the witness. Nothing is beyond justice. Procedure law is handmaid of justice.
I agree with Ad Assumi that any thing can be done by cross.
The purpose and benefit of cross is to disprove the case of the opponent.
Our Network Sites
N.K.Assumi
