PATEL JASMAT VIRJI Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) * * * *

(2.) WE have gone through the entire cross-examination of this witness and only a suggestion was put to her to indicate that the deceased bad illicit intimacy with one Naran but that suggestion was denied by this witness the daughter of the deceased aged about 14 5rears. WE may incidentally state that it is always open to the cross-examiner while defending the liberty of any citizen to vigorously cross-examine any of the prosecution witnesses but in defending the liberty of a citizen the suggestion which comes from the defence should not be tasteless or of such a nature which would annoy a judicial mind. Without any proof or any cogent material what was the justification for the cross-examiner to put the aforesaid question to the daughter of the deceased that the deceased was having illicit intimacy with one Naran ? It is expected and it is high time that we should observe that though it is open to any cross-examiner to put questions to the witnesses with a view to search out the real truth in regard to the accusation levelled against the accused persons but while putting questions to the witnesses the cross-examiner should keep certain standard of decency and decorum particularly when his obvious only object is to serve and aid the cause of justice. WE fail to understand as to why a young daughter should have been told after the cruel death of her mother by her father that her mother was so degenerated in life even at the age of 40 that she was having illicit intimacy. Experience shows that the record would remain more dignified and decent even on the shelf of court rooms if such suggestions are not put to the grown up children of the victims.