S.K.Kapur, J.

1. This criminal revision is directed against the order of the learned Sessions Judge, Delhi dated the 24th December 1963 and raises the question of construction of sections 493 arid 495, Criminal Procedure Code. The first information report was lodged against the petitioner Roop K. Shorey alleging that he had committed .an offence .under sec. 420, Iadian Penal Code. Charge was framed in pursuance of the said first information report and the examination of the prosecution witnesses started on 2nd March, 1963, with the examination of Ram Parshad complainant. His cross-examination commenced on 5th March, 1963, and continued on 6th March, 1963. Mr. R. L. Anaad Advo- cate appeared on these days on behalf of Ram Parshad complainant. It has been alleged by the petitioner that instead of the Public Prosecutor, Mr. Anand conducted the examination-in chief of the first prosecution witness, and put all type of leading questions to him. On an objaction on behalf of the petitioner that Mr. Anand had no authority to appear on behalf of the complainant he filed his power-of-attorney on 6th March, 1963. It is furtherJ alleged that even when Ram Parshad was being crossexamine