Closing of right of cross - examination --- Effect -- Accused was charged for committing rape with complainant - During the course of trial , examination -

 PLD 2023 Lahore 300

Closing of right of cross - examination --- Effect -- Accused was charged for committing rape with complainant - During the course of trial , examination - in - chief of two prosecution witnesses were opportunities were provided to petitioner ( accused ) to cross examine the said witnesses but upon his failure , his right to cross - examine was struck off --- Validity --- Right of cross examination was a statutory right recognized and provided under Art . 133 , Qanun - e - Shahadat , 1984 --- In a criminal case , it was obligatory upon the court to fulfill such statutory requirement in its true spirit --- Right to fair trial , which is now enshrined in Constitution under Art . 10 - A of the Constitution , included right of an accused to confront his accuser --- Despite that fact , the accused could not be allowed to hijack the trial proceedings in garb of safeguarding the right to fair trial --- Accused at times attempted to linger on the trial proceedings with nefarious designs to tamper with the prosecution evidence or avoid his expected conviction and penal consequences , which should not be permitted by the Trial Court --- Trial Court was not helpless to proceed further without violating the right to fair trial , especially right to confront one's accuser --- Under R. 1 , Part C , Vol . 3 , Chap . 24 of the High Court ( Lahore ) Rules and Orders , if an accused was unrepresented in a Sessions case and he could not afford to engage a counsel , the Sessions Judge / Additional Sessions Judge was bound to make arrangement to employ a counsel at government expense for the said accused --- Keeping in view the literal meaning of term ' unrepresented as used in R. 1 , Part C , Vol . 3 , Chap . 24 of the High Court ( Lahore ) Rules and Orders , an accused , who although had arranged a counsel , who also filed his power of attorney on his behalf , would deem to be ' unrepresented if his counsel did not appear before the court and unnecessary delay was caused in early conclusion of trial --- Whenever a Trial Court was confronted with such situation , there would be two options available to such court , first was to adjourn the case for a future date or if Trial Court did not deem it appropriate to adjourn the case , then to provide a capable and skilled counsel to the accused on state expenses to carry out cross - examination on prosecution witnesses or court witnesses , if any --- In the present case defence counsel gave an undertaking on behalf of petitioner that prosecution witnesses would be cross - examined at the first date of hearing High Court observed and directed that if the same was not done , Trial Court should appoint counsel on State expense as envisaged under R. 1. Part C , Vol . 3 , Chap . 24 of the High Court ( Lahore ) Rules Orders and should proceed with the trial expeditiously without letting petitioner / accused abuse the process of law any further.