ROSHAN ALI Versus THE STATE Muhammad Ashraf Leghari , Riaz Ahmad

Mr. Syed Riaz Ahmed, learned counsel for the State is put on Court notice and with his consent the application is being taken up for regular hearing.

2. By this revision application the applicant has prayed that the order of lower Court dismissing his prayer that complainant be recalled for cross‑examination under section 540, Cr.P.C. be set aside and he be allowed to further cross‑examine the complainant.

3. The applicant is facing trial under section 302, P. P. C. before the Sessions Judge, Hyderabad. There were a number of prosecution witnesses which were to be examined. The trial started with the examination of the complainant which was recorded on 9‑10‑1986. By that time the applicant was unable to engage an Advocate and, therefore, Mr. Ahmed Ali Shaikh who was appointed as pauper Advocate conducted the cross‑examination of the complainant. Thereafter, the applicant engaged Mr. Allah Dino Memon (now Mr.. Justice) as a defence counsel for cross‑examining the witnesses. After Mr. Justice Allah Dino Memon was elevated to the Bench Mr. Muhammad Ashraf Leghari took up the brief and has cross‑examined the remaining witnesses. Mr. Leghari has been heard by me. He has stated that he bona fidely feels that further cross‑examination of the complainant is necessary as important questions relating to previous enmity contradictions in the deposition and F.I.R. and interestedness of the witnesses have been left out by the pauper Advocate and, therefore, necessity of recalling the complainant has arisen. If this prayer is not granted the accused's defence will be seriously hampered.

4. Mr. Syed Riaz Ahmed, learned State counsel concedes that the request appears to be bona fide. He however, submits that in this account the trial should not be unnecessarily delayed, as it is a murder case.

5. Under these circumstances I allow the revision application and direct that complainant be recalled under section 540, Cr.P.C. and opportunity be given to the learned defence counsel to cross‑examine him. Mr. Leghari undertakes that in case the complainant is present on 7‑2‑1988 he will cross‑examine him then and there.

M.Y.H./R‑46/K Revision accepted.