( 1 ) ). * * * *

( 2 ) ). In the instant case, learned defence Advocate while cross-examining the witnesses have put various questions with a view to bring out either contradictions or omissions. Section 162 of the Criminal Procedure Code has been added with an Explanation, in view of the reported decision of Honourable Supreme Court in the case of Tahsildar Singh v. State of U. P. , reported in AIR 1959 SC 1012, which reads as under : explanation 1- An omission to state a fact or circumstances in the statements referred to in sub-sec. (1) may amount to contradiction if the same appears to be significant and otherwise relevant having regard to the context in which such omission occurs and whether any omission amounts to a contradiction in the particular context shall be a question of fact.

( 3 ) ). The procedure has been indicated in the aforesaid decision as to how the same is to be proved. Learned defence Counsel Mr. Shah as well as learned additional Public Prosecutor, after scanning the questions put in the cross examination with regard to omissions or contradictions with the police statement, submitted that in the instant case all the three, i. e. , learned Advoc