The charge on which the petitioner is convicted is that he gave instructions to P.W.6, the lawyer, who put certain questions which were defamatory. P.W.6 having acted as lawyer to the petitioner is debarred under section 126 of the Evidence Act to disclose the instructions given to him. Apart from the section which is clear on the point, it is also covered by the judgment of Burn, J., in Palaniappa Chettiar v. Emperor1. The only other evidence is that given by P.W.4. But that does not prove the prosecution case. The conviction by the learned Additional Magistrate on the evidence of the lawyer P.W.6 is unsustainable. It is set aside and the accused acquitted. The fine, if paid, will be refunded.

V.S. ----- Petition allowed.