Jesus was in a Jewish court of Law and did not need to say anything. It was up to those who accused Him to prove their charges.
So Jesus asked the High Priest why ask Him, go and ask those to whom He had spoken. (iow bring your witnesses).
It's not so simple, allow me explain in detail...
People did not complain about Jesus, they saw him as prophet predicted by Moses.
It was Jewish priesthood that complained about Jesus because they saw him as challenging their authority.
Jewish priests could not simply go against Jesus because people were on his side,
doing so would be counter productive because they would turn people against them self.
Therefore what priests did was trying to catch Jesus in words which go against Jewish teachings and tradition, such as Jesus directly telling he's son of God,
this would give them a case to turn people against Jesus for blasphemy.
How could they do this?
According to Jewish law there need to be at least 2 witnesses to prove anyone wrong - see Deuteronomy 19:15
This means priests don't need to prove Jesus wrong before people, it's enough to have few witnesses and people no longer matter.
Priests therefore take Jesus to high priest Anna who is surrounded by witnesses.
Interrogation before the high priest with witnesses starts:
The high priest questioned Jesus about his disciples and about his doctrine.
It is important to note here that Anna doesn't care for fair interrogation, all that he cares about is word play to make Jesus telling what ever that goes against tradition and the law before Anna's witnesses.
This way Anna would have witnesses and he could judge him according to the law.
Jesus knows pretty well that Anna is plotting against him in such a manner (trying to catch him in words), and this is where Jesus returns the plot in same manner to Anna before witnesses (an eye for an eye) by trying to catch Anna in words by telling Anna to go ask people.
Because people are on his side this would prove Anna wrong before people as well as before Anna's witnesses and Anna's plot against Jesus would actually be Jesus' plot against Anna.
Anna's servant spotted this and slapped Jesus for ex. "how do you dare to plot against Anna?" under umbrella of "Is this the way you answer the high priest?"
In other words we are here to ask questions not you, you're supposed to give an answer not to question high priest' integrity.
Do you see now?
Anna was plotting against Jesus and Jesus attempted to plot against Anna in same manner, this is why Jesus didn't turn the other cheek around but did an eye for an eye.
This is not about fair judgement and who is right but about catching each other in words.
Jesus tried to catch Anna in words (in same manner, an eye for an eye) but he was supposed to only answer to the questions instead.
If Jesus simply answered to the question this would be completely different story.
But if you accuse Jesus of taking revenge by asking "Why did you hit me, what did I say that was wrong?" we have to agree to disagree.
Therefore no, revenge lies in that Jesus was questioning Anna in same insidious manner as Anna while he was only supposed to answer to the question.
"Why did you hit me, what did I say that was wrong?" after servant slapped him only confirms that Jesus insists rather than to answer to the question.
If Jesus answered to the question they would for certain catch Jesus in words because he would be forced to deny he is son of God, which he would not do and would therefore be judged by high priest.
