( 1 ) "whether and when the panch-witness having supported the prosecution case in his examination-in-chief and ultimately during the crossexamination started giving evidence prejudicial, rather destructive to the prosecution, then under the circumstances, learned trial Judge was justified in not permitting the learned P. P. to re-examine him and/or to put him leading question/s in the nature of cross-examination merely because moment and at the time the witness started deviating bidding good-bye to the prosecution case, adding or substracting from the original statement, the learned P. P. failed to object and make request to reexamine or cross-examine as the case may be ?? This in short, precisely is the question which this Court is called upon to answer, arising in the context and background of the facts-situation of the case narrated hereunder.

( 2 ) TO state few relevant facts - Pirubhai Jivabhai Mistry with others came to be tried for the alleged offences punishable under Secs. 307, 324, 147, 148, 149 and 294 of the Indian Penal Code read with Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police Act, 1951 by the learned Addl. Sessions Case No. 140 of 1992. During the course of trial,