KAVITHA MAHESH Vs. CHIEF ELECTION COMMISSIONER

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Mr. Shashikantha C, learned Counsel for the Respondent wants to pose the following suggestion and elicit the answer from the Petitioner:

(2.) Petitioner who is deposing, is the first witness being cross-examined by the learned Counsel for the Respondent. Petitioner also happens to be an Advocate by profession and is conducting her case by herself as an "Advocate-in-person" as described by the Supreme Court.

(3.) At the beginning of the proceedings of the day when the matter was taken up. Petitioner had made a submission that the learned Counsel for the Respondent has been exceeding his limits as a counsel for examining a witness and the Petitioner is virtually being subjected to harassment in the guise of cross-examination and therefore, Petitioner seeks the proceedings being regulated, to protect her interest both in the capacity as an Advocate-in-person and as a Petitioner who has deposed in support of her case and has sought permission of the Court to respond suitably and if necessary, by addressing arguments, even while she continues to depose before the Court, as she is performing the dual role of deposing as a witness and conducting her case herself as an advocate-party-in-person and has sought for the permission of the Court to step out of the witness box as and when she has to play the role of advocate-in-person to oppose an irrelevant or unreasonable question being posed during the course of cross-examination!