Cross-examination rights in cheque cases: denial of fair opportunity justified remand despite absence of a Section 145(2) application.

An accused must be given a real opportunity to cross-examine complainant witnesses, and denial of that opportunity renders the evidence incomplete and procedurally infirm. Where the record shows that the matter was listed for evidence, not for a Section 313 CrPC statement, the omission to permit cross-examination cannot be cured by a purely technical objection that no application under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act was filed. The HC held that such denial violates natural justice and can justify remand; the appellate court's remand order was therefore sustained and the revision was rejected.

---

---

Issues: Whether the accused was denied a fair opportunity to cross-examine the complainant's witnesses, and whether the remand ordered by the appellate court was justified despite the absence of an application under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881.

Analysis: The complainant's evidence had been recorded without affording any opportunity to the accused to cross-examine the witness. The record showed that the matter was listed for evidence and not for recording the statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973. In such a situation, the right to cross-examine could not be denied on a purely technical objection that no application under Section 145(2) had been filed, because cross-examination is an integral part of fair procedure and of the principles of natural justice. The omission to permit cross-examination rendered the evidence incomplete and caused an inherent infirmity in the trial.

Conclusion: The remand ordered by the appellate court was justified, and the challenge to that order failed.

Final Conclusion: The revision was rejected, and the order setting aside the conviction and remanding the matter to the trial court for affording cross-examination was sustained.

Ratio Decidendi: Denial of a real opportunity to cross-examine a witness, where evidence is recorded without such opportunity, constitutes a violation of natural justice and an inherent infirmity that can justify remand even if no application under Section 145(2) of the Negotiable Instruments Act, 1881 was filed.

---