criminal case against him, by filing criminal application in this Court, his counsel did not cross examine the respondent no.2. Trial Court, therefore, passed an order to the effect ‘no cross’. On an application made by the accused, the said order, however, was set aside by the trial Court and consequently, the accused was permitted to cross examine the respondent no.2. While allowing the accused to cross examine the respondent no.2, the trial Court had put certain stringent conditions, which were set aside by this Court. Since the prosecution had not complied with some of the directions given by this Court, the applicant moved the trial Court by making an application (Exhibit 91) for quashing the evidence of the prosecution. This application was rejected by the trial Court. The applicant then filed another application (Exhibit 93) seeking directions from the trial Court to the effect that the respondent no.2 should be directed first to remain present before the trial Court for his cross examination, and that, before he is cross examined, the other witnesses for the prosecution should not be examined. This application was opposed by the prosecution. The applicant thereafter filed another application (Exhibit 100) stating that he had no objection, if certain witnesses for the prosecution :- viz :- the witnesses mentioned at Sr. Nos. 6, 10 and 11 in the list of witnesses are examined, before the cross examination of the respondent no.2 is taken. The applicant made it clear that the said application (Exhibit 100) was made without prejudice to his contention in the applications (Exhibit 91 and Exhibit 93).
