Om Prakash Jain, J. - (1.) HEARD Sri Pankaj Bhatia for the petitioner and Mr. Rajesh Tandon for respondent No. 2. This writ petition is directed against an order rejecting the prayer of the petitioner for cross -examination of respondent No. 2. The learned Counsel for the petitioner has brought to the notice of the Court, 1995 (1) ARC 511 and, 1995 (1) ARC 308, which are two judgments by which the question regarding the right of cross -examination has been referred to a Larger Bench.
(2.) SRI Rajesh Tandon has cited, 1995 (1) ARC 452, given in Civil Misc. Writ Petition No. 8939 of 1995 in which the same learned Judge has rejected a writ petition filed against the rejection of application for cross -examination. The writ petition was dismissed on the ground that the application was filed very late. In the instant case also the Court below has observed in the impugned order that the application for cross -examination has been filed at the fag end of the case. It is also stated in the impugned order that a number of adjournments were granted in the case and on the date fixed for final arguments the prayer for cross -examination was made. The learned Counsel for the respondent has invited my attention to Rule 15, sub -clause (3) which says that an application for release has to be decided within a period of two months as for as possible. This objective cannot be achieved if cross -examination is ordered as a matter of routine. The writ petition has no force and is hereby dismissed summarily.;