1. 'The petitioner is aggrieved of order dated 5-1-2010 of learned Sessions Judge, Layyah whereby the right of cross-examining the witnesses, already bound by the Court by virtue of a previous order to appear in person, was closed on the ground that as one witness P.W.4 was absent on the day and the learned counsel of the petitioner did not accede the direction of the learned Court to cross- examine the rest of the witnesses on the ground that the cross-examination made to other witnesses would be disclosed for P.W.4 Muhammad Akhtar Hussain, the recovery witness.
2. As the matter is pending before learned Sessions Judge for disposal of the trial and in case the notice is issued to the State, the case would be lingered on as patently order made by the learned Sessions Judge appears somewhat harsh because either the said witness who was already bound down should have been proceeded against for non-appearance or might have been given up by the prosecution in order to get recorded the remaining witnesses i.e, P.W.5 and P.W.6. In the circumstances, the criminal revision is accepted with the direction to the learned Sessions Judge that at least one opportunity be given to the petitioner to cross-examine the present witness i.e, P.W.4 including P.W.S.And P.W.6 if they are along with other relevant witnesses are present and in case the P.W.4 or other witnesses are not made present, in spite of services of notices, some appropriate steps be taken against them for presence before the Court including issuance of bailable or non-bailable warrants. Disposed of.