An Order Passed After Court Hours Cannot Shut An Accused Out Of Cross-Examination
A restaurant and its partner facing a cheque-bounce case lost the right to cross-examine the complainant after missing a hearing the online case status had shown for a different date. The Himachal Pradesh High Court has given that right back.
The Court held the trial court's order was passed at 4.30 p.m., after normal court hours, and no litigant can be expected to appear after court hours, so it could not stand on that ground alone. The case status showed the wrong date, and the accused could not be penalised for their counsel's lapse. The order was set aside, subject to costs of Rs 5,000 payable to the complainant before cross-examination.
- Court hours are a real limit. An adverse order after hours, in a party's absence, cannot stand.
- A wrong online case status is a genuine reason for missing a hearing.
- A litigant is not punished for a lawyer's lapse in failing to seek exemption.
- The second chance has a price. Costs must be paid to the complainant first.
- Court
- High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla
- Bench
- Justice HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA
- Citation
- Cr.MMO No. 131 of 2026
- Case
- Cr.MMO No. 131 of 2026
- Decided
- 10 September 2026
- Outcome
- Petition allowed; order closing cross-examination set aside subject to costs
What happened at the trial court
Mohinder Singh filed a complaint under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act against Stoneys Restaurant and another over a dishonoured cheque of Rs 5 lakh, before the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Lahaul and Spiti at Kullu. The accused pleaded not guilty.
The complainant's evidence was listed for 22 January 2026. The online case status, however, showed the next date as 23 February 2026. When the accused learnt of the actual listing, they asked their lawyer to seek exemption from appearance.
The lawyer appeared in the morning and said he would file the exemption application after lunch. When the case was called after lunch, nobody was present, and at 4.30 p.m. the trial court closed the accused's right to cross-examine the complainant.
Why the High Court set it aside
Justice Rakesh Kainthla relied on earlier Himachal rulings that ordinary court hours for subordinate courts run from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m., and that no litigant can legitimately be expected to appear after them. An adverse order passed at 4.30 p.m. could not be sustained on that short ground alone.
The case status annexed to the petition supported the accused's account of the date mix-up, and the order sheet itself recorded the lawyer's promise to file an exemption application. The accused could not be penalised for their counsel's failure.
The Court accepted that Section 309 of the Code of Criminal Procedure lets a court dispense with cross-examination when a party or lawyer is absent, but noted that courts have allowed a fresh opportunity on payment of costs where the defence would otherwise suffer.
The result
The order of 22 January 2026 was set aside. The accused must pay Rs 5,000 as costs to the complainant, which is a condition before they may cross-examine him.
The Court clarified that its observations do not touch the merits of the cheque case.
Who argued it
Appearances as recorded in the judgment of the Court.
Frequently asked
Can a court close cross-examination after court hours?
The Himachal High Court held an adverse order passed after hours, in a party's absence, could not be sustained.
Does a wrong date on the online case status help?
Here it corroborated the accused's reason for not appearing and supported restoring their right.
If your right to cross-examine was closed
- Check the time the order was passed against the court's working hours.
- Save a screenshot of the case status if it showed a different date.
- Look at the order sheet for any record of your lawyer's request.
- Be ready to pay costs as the price of a fresh opportunity.
Source. High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla, Cr.MMO No. 131 of 2026, decided 10 September 2026 by Justice HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE RAKESH KAINTHLA. This explainer is written from the judgment text as reported.
Claw tracks High Court of Himachal Pradesh at Shimla and 24 other High Courts, reads every order handed back, and surfaces the directions that carry a deadline. clawlaw.in