Unrepresented accused

Accused's counsel was not present at the time of cross-examination of witnesses and Trial Court asked accused to cross-examine witnesses himself

Validity

When counsel did not show up for one reason or another, there was no warrant to penalize the accused, charged with a capital offence

Either the hearing of the case could have been adjourned or Trial Court was to engage a counsel for the petitioner at State expense

Trial Court overlooked the fact that due process and fair trial were guaranteed as a Fundamental Right under the Constitution vide Article 10-A of the same

Cross-examination by accused can never be a substitute for the cross-examination carried out by a trained legal mind/counsel

Revision was allowed accordingly.

Cross-examination conducted by accused himself could not be considered to be a substitute of cross-examination conducted by a counsel.