ANAL ROY CHOUDHURY Vs. MADHAB SAHA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The petitioner, by means of this petition, had prayed for the grant of various reliefs and had specifically prayed that the order under challenged is illegal and not in accordance with law.

(2.) I had heard the matter on 4th January, 2016 and I was not in agreement with the learned counsel for the petitioner and according to me the order was a very legitimate and proper order. No party can try to overreach the Court by almost threatening that either its request be accepted or the Judge recuse from the case.

(3.) On going through the records I find that the main dispute was with regard to the recording the cross-examination of a witness. In cross-examination the witness stated that he did not personally know the defendant. Thereafter, a suggestion was put to him that he had stated a lie in the affidavit wherein it was mentioned that he knew the parties. The answer of the witness was that since the name of the defendant who is the Editor of a well known Paper is printed in the newspaper he had stated that he knows the defendant but not that he personally knew the defendant.