Can a defendant be cross examined if he has not entered as witness

Vague query without facts can not lead to form an opinion and oblige.

Therefore, if you are a party to suit it is advisable to consult your lawyer who is well aware about facts and circumstances of the case, an able, competent and intelligent enough to satisfy your question(s).

Change him/herimmediately, if you have lost faith in the lawyer engaged/paid.

No chief, no Cross.    Cross is not compulsory after Chief.    But coercive Chief is not uncommon.

Coercive Chief by Defendant is not possible.

Yes the defendant can be called to the witness box to serve as an evidence to the facts stated by him/her, but there is a procedure that needs to be followed.

If the defendant has pleaded not guilty, he/she must submit evidence in support of his/her statement, and the court will need to hear evidence from witnesses in order to decide whether the defendant is guilty or not. After the other witnesses have been cross examined, the lawyer of the defendant must depose the defendant himself as a witness. He will then be examined in chief by his own lawyer first and after the examination in chief is done, the opposing party’s lawyer can cross examine him.

In this particular case of dispute over property, since you have stated that the defendant has provided false facts, he/she will also have to submit evidence supporting the facts stated by him/her and this includes entering the witness box themselves.

The defence is required to lead the  evidence to prove questions of fact pleaded in the written. If no evidence is adduced, the Court is bound to take such pleadings as not proved.

Provisions of Indian Evidence Act are absoultely clear.

Evidence is incomplete without cross-examination, misconception of one of the above respondent.

It is advisable to consult your lawyer for appreciation of facts/ documents and professional advise, if you are a party to suit .

In the above posting, "written" may be read as "written statement". The lapse is regretted.