1. Heard.

2. Admit.

3. Heard finally by consent of learned counsel appearing for the parties.

4. What is challenge in this application is the order dated 24.6.2016 passed by the learned Sessions Judge, Wardha rejecting the application filed under Section 311 of the Code of Criminal Procedure by the applicant, the accused in Sessions Trial No.94/2014, in which he is being prosecuted for an offence punishable under Section 302 of the Indian Penal Code.

5. Learned Sessions Judge has taken a view that when the opportunity was available to the accused to put necessary questions to witnesses, namely, PW 3 and PW 7, the opportunity was waisted and, therefore, any attempt made as an afterthought to put these questions would amount to filling up the lacuna in the defence. On this ground, the learned Sessions Judge has turned down the request of the applicant.

6. Learned counsel for the applicant submits that this was not the case of filling up the lacuna, but an attempt to correct the error occurred while cross-examining the witnesses and, therefore, the application ought to have been allowed. He also submits that no prejudice would be caused to the prosecution, if two witnesses are re