Right Of Cross-Examination To Accused To Test Veracity Of Statement Is Most Vital Part Of Criminal Trial: Delhi HC
Detailed Explanation:
1. Right of Cross-Examination: A Fundamental Aspect of Fair Trial
The right to cross-examine witnesses is a fundamental right of the accused in a criminal trial.
It allows the accused or their lawyer to challenge the credibility, reliability, and truthfulness of the prosecution witnesses.
Cross-examination tests the veracity of statements and exposes inconsistencies, exaggerations, or falsehoods.
It ensures the accused gets a fair opportunity to defend themselves as mandated by the principles of natural justice and Article 21 (Right to Life and Personal Liberty) of the Constitution.
2. Significance in Criminal Trials
Cross-examination is not just a procedural formality but the heart of the adversarial criminal justice system.
It provides a safeguard against wrongful convictions by scrutinizing evidence presented against the accused.
Without cross-examination, unilateral evidence would remain untested, which would be unfair.
Courts have repeatedly held that the test of truth is cross-examination.
3. Delhi High Court’s Observations
The Delhi HC has stressed that the accused’s right to cross-examination is sacrosanct.
Denial or curtailment of this right amounts to a violation of the right to a fair trial.
The court has emphasized that the veracity of the prosecution’s case must be tested through cross-examination before any adverse inference can be drawn.
This right helps in upholding the principles of justice, fairness, and equality in the trial process.
4. Key Case Laws
a) State of U.P. v. Rajesh Gautam, (2003) 5 SCC 180
The Supreme Court observed that the right of cross-examination is a fundamental right of the accused.
Cross-examination is essential to test the reliability and credibility of the prosecution witnesses.
It is only after thorough cross-examination that the court can decide on the weight to be given to a witness’s statement.
b) K. Ramachandra Reddy v. Public Prosecutor, AIR 1955 SC 549
The Court held that the right to cross-examine is part of the right to a fair trial.
Any restriction on this right amounts to denial of justice.
Cross-examination is the best method to expose falsehood or mistakes.
c) R. v. Baskerville, (1916) 11 Cr App Rep 229
Although a British case, it is cited often in Indian law for emphasizing that the truth of a witness’s testimony must be tested by cross-examination.
If a witness is not cross-examined, their statement cannot be relied upon lightly.
d) Delhi HC in Vikramjit Singh v. State, Bail Application No. 784/2020
The court reiterated that the accused’s right to cross-examine witnesses is crucial to test the prosecution’s case.
It held that no adverse inference can be drawn without providing the accused a fair chance to cross-examine.
5. Practical Implications
| Aspect | Explanation |
|---|---|
| Right of accused | Must be given full opportunity to cross-examine all prosecution witnesses |
| Importance | Cross-examination helps reveal contradictions and biases |
| Impact on evidence | Evidence not subjected to cross-examination generally holds less weight |
| Court’s duty | Ensure fair trial by upholding this right strictly |
6. Conclusion
The right to cross-examination is a cornerstone of criminal justice. It protects the accused from untested accusations and is critical for determining the truth. The Delhi High Court, along with the Supreme Court, has firmly established that any curtailment of this right is a violation of fair trial principles. Without cross-examination, the credibility of statements cannot be judged, jeopardizing the fairness of the entire trial.
RELATED Blog
0 comments