In the light of the aforesaid, when the case in hand with regard to recall of P.W.4, is addressed, it appears that the P.W.4 is a victim of rape. She has already been examined and cross-examined in extenso, as revealed from the order of the learned trial Court. After closure of the evidence, when the case was posted for Accused Statement, a petition was filed to recall the P.W.4. The trial Court with the opinion that chance of fiddling the evidence on recall being not ruled out and also the P.W.4 being a victim of rape, legal prudence does not allow the victim to be examined and crossexamined time and again, refused to recall the said witness. As it appears, in this case, the recall was sought for on the ground that the conducting counsel was absent on the date of cross-examination, but cross-examination has been done in extenso by the other counsel assisting him. Prayer for recall was made when the case has reached the stage of Accused Statement. The ground shown in the recall petition is that the defence wants to recall the P.W.4 to put some leading questions. However, no detail about the leading questions to be asked has been brought to the notice of this Court. The witness is a victim of rape and she is undergoing torment being allegedly raped to run to the Court to prove her case. She has also been subjected to
