In Brief
An accused facing trial under Section 308 IPC sought extension of time to deposit a cost amount ordered by the High Court to cross-examine prosecution witnesses. He deposited the amount 9 days late but the High Court refused the extension without considering his explanation, forfeiting his right to cross-examine. The Supreme Court held that rigidly denying a short extension despite substantial compliance and plausible explanation causes miscarriage of justice. The Court set aside the High Court's order, recognizing that the right to cross-examine is fundamental and cannot be forfeited on technical grounds.
The lawyer headnote and full judgment text are available to registered users.