<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Court Denies Fair Hearing: Cheque Dishonor Case Highlights Right to Cross-Examination Under Article 21 of Indian Constitution.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=60235</link>
    <description>Dishonor of Cheque - Principles of natural justice - The right to cross-examination is a part of right to fair trial, which, every person has in the spirit of the right to life and personal liberty as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India - In the case in hand, on the relevant date i.e. on 03.05.2018, the petitioner remained absent in the court and his counsel also remained absent though he has filed hazira. Thus, the petitioner remained unrepresented on that day. Therefore, the impugned order, closing the evidence of P.W.1, behind the back of the petitioners and also his counsel, is denial of fair hearing, as it has infringed their right to fair trial. - HC</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2021 11:41:12 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2021 11:41:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=659379" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Court Denies Fair Hearing: Cheque Dishonor Case Highlights Right to Cross-Examination Under Article 21 of Indian Constitution.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=60235</link>
      <description>Dishonor of Cheque - Principles of natural justice - The right to cross-examination is a part of right to fair trial, which, every person has in the spirit of the right to life and personal liberty as enshrined in Article 21 of the Constitution of India - In the case in hand, on the relevant date i.e. on 03.05.2018, the petitioner remained absent in the court and his counsel also remained absent though he has filed hazira. Thus, the petitioner remained unrepresented on that day. Therefore, the impugned order, closing the evidence of P.W.1, behind the back of the petitioners and also his counsel, is denial of fair hearing, as it has infringed their right to fair trial. - HC</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Indian Laws</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Oct 2021 11:41:12 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=60235</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>