એવીડન્સ એક્ટ ની કલમ – ૧૪૫ ની જોગવાઈ ધ્યાને લેવામાં આવેતો તે સાક્ક્ષીઓં દ્વારા અગાઉથી કોઈ લેખિતમાં સ્ટેટમેન્ટ આપવામાં આવેલ હોય તેની ક્રોસ એક્ષમિનેશન એટલે કે, ઉલટ તપાસ અંગેની જોગવાઈ સંબંધે છે. જયારે સાક્ક્ષીની વિરુદ્ધ કોઈ દસ્તાવેજના ઉપયોગ ઉલટ તપાસ માટે કરવામાં આવે ત્યારે તે ડોક્યુમેન્ટમાં જણાવેલ અસ્પષ્ટતા અથવા વિવાદના પ્રશ્ન અંગે સાક્ષીને સ્પષ્ટતા કરવાની તક આપવી જોઈએ.( પારા ૧૧)

રીલેટેડ પેરેગ્રાફ :

11. The plaintiff further relied on an alleged apparent inconsistency in the defendant’s case namely, that Exts.J-1 to J-5 show the defendant Mohammad Yusuf’s order of dismissal of the managing committee to have been signed by some of the plaintiffs themselves on July 13, 1953, whereas Exts.3 to 8/c (subscription books) show that the subscriptions, said to have been raised by the managing committee related to a period upto January 5, 1954 that is to say, about six months after the defendant’s order of dismissal of the managing committee: the plaintiffs’ comment is that, if indeed the managing committee was dismissed by the defendant in July 1953, then how could these subscriptions books relate to the period six months after the dismissal. It, however appears that there was no cross-examination on the point by reference to Exts.8 to 8/c. Indeed, on general principles, it would appear to be sound that if a witness is under cross-examination on oath, he should be given the opportunity, if documents are to be used against him, to tender his explanation and to clear up the particular point of ambiguity or dispute: that is a general, salutary and intelligible rule. In the present case no question was put to the defendant Mohammad Yusuf, while giving evidence as D.W.1, who could have explained the position by reference to the documents. Thus, the plaintiff’s contention on this point is untenable.