Case Law Details
Ajay Saraogi Vs Union of India (Calcutta High Court)
Calcutta High Court held that initiation of adjudication proceeding without allowing cross-examination of person whose statements recorded and relied upon in the adjudication proceeding makes the entire proceeding vitiated.
Facts- Primarily, the issue which has fallen for consideration in the three appeals is whether the adjudicating authority was right in refusing an opportunity of cross-examination of natural persons whose statements recorded under Section 108 of the Customs Act, 1962 had been referred to and relied upon in the adjudication order, or not.
Conclusion- In Sampad Narayan Mukherjee it was held that once an adjudication proceeding is initiated, and a statement made under Section 108 of the Act of 1962 is introduced as a piece of evidence in such adjudication proceedings, then, the person making that statement must be made available for cross-examination to the party against whom such statement has been used in the adjudication proceedings, subject to the provisions of Section 138B of the Act of 1962.
Held that the authorities had introduced evidence of natural persons in the adjudication proceedings, the appellant was entitled to cross-examine such natural person. Not having been allowed to cross-examine such witness of the prosecution, in the adjudication proceedings, the entire proceedings stood vitiated. The appellate authority had incorrectly held that the appellant was not entitled to cross-examine the prosecution witnesses.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
