Court quashes order for lack of natural justice, emphasizes right to cross-examine in adjudication

The High Court of Calcutta quashed an order in original for breach of natural justice as the adjudicating authority denied the petitioners' right to cross-examine prosecution witnesses. The Court emphasized the importance of allowing cross-examination in adversarial litigation and directed the authority to proceed afresh, ensuring the petitioners' rights. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, leaving all points raised open for future consideration.

---

---

Issues: Challenge to an order in original on the ground of breach of natural justice by denying the right of cross-examination to the petitioners.

Analysis:
The High Court of Calcutta heard a writ petition challenging an order in original dated May 31, 2018, which was appealable but maintained on the ground of breach of natural justice. The petitioners contended that the adjudicating authority did not grant them the right to cross-examine a prosecution witness despite a written request. The Court noted that the impugned order did not address the request for cross-examination made on April 25, 2018. The Customs authorities argued that the petitioners were attempting to delay proceedings, citing a granted adjournment on April 6, 2018, and a show-cause notice issued on February 13, 2018. The Customs authorities had accused the petitioners of smuggling foreign-origin cigarettes into India, relying on the statement of a witness named Ravinder Kapoor. The petitioners also sought to cross-examine another prosecution witness, Tapan Ghosh.

The Court emphasized the importance of natural justice in adversarial litigation, stating that the delinquent party should be allowed to cross-examine witnesses presented by the prosecution. Since the petitioners' request for cross-examination was not considered by the adjudicating authority, the Court found a breach of natural justice, leading to the impugned order being quashed. The Court directed the adjudicating authority to proceed afresh from the stage reached on April 25, 2018, or as deemed appropriate, ensuring the petitioners' right to cross-examine witnesses. The writ petition was disposed of with no order as to costs, keeping all points raised by the parties open for future consideration.

---