The appellant in this case was the first accused in Sessions Case No. 18 of 1949 on the file of the Court of Session, Anantapur. He and another were tried for an offence under section 307, Indian Penal Code. The second accused was acquitted, but the appellant alone was convicted and sentenced to rigorous imprisonment for two years and to pay a fine of Rs. 100.

This appeal has to be allowed on a question of law. The occurrence is said to have taken place at about 11p.m. on the 1st February, 1949. Information was given at about 1 am. on 2nd February, 1949. It was recorded by P.W.7, who was the station writer of the police station, where the information was given. He says in his evidence that he investigated into the case and recorded statements of witnesses. He examined P.W.1 and he also examined P.Ws.3 to 6 and recorded their statements. These statements constitute statements under section 162, Criminal Procedure Code. The learned Sessions Judge finds in paragraph 6 of his judgment that these statements were not made available to the accused for cross-examination; but he rests content with remarking that “the police in this case did not play the game well”. In my opinion the