JUDGMENT : KNOX, J. 1. Read explanation furnished by the learned Magistrate. The Magistrate will find that he might have avoided the difficulties into which he put the witnesses for the prosecution if he had carefully followed the provisions of the Criminal Procedure Code. The case was apparently placed before the court on the 28th of June and the Magistrate very properly heard the complainant and took all the evidence produced in support of the prosecution. This appears to have occupied the 28th and the 29th of June. I do not know whether the witnesses for the prosecution examined on the 28th were permitted to return to their homes. We will presume that this was not done and that the Magistrate with an eye upon the provisions of section 256 retained them in attendance, By the 29th of June, the Magistrate had ground for presuming that the accused had committed an offence triable under Chapter XXI. He should at once have gone on to examine the accused and to draw up a charge. Had he done this on the 29th, the witnesses for the prosecution whose evidence had been taken could have been recalled. The word ‘recall’ is very significant and does not mean re-summon. The grace given of two days for cross-examination was a distinct mistake and should be avoided in future. If the pleader for the defence who had heard the evidence in chief is not prepared to cross-examine then and there after the charge sheet had been drawn up, he hardly deserves the name and rank of pleader. Cross-examination is intended for testing the accuracy and credibility of the witnesses, not for building up a case for the defence, and the witnesses should then and their after cross and re-examination have been discharged and they would have been discharged with a minimum of inconvenience. Then should follow the evidence of the remaining witnesses for the prosecution who should then and there be cross-examined and re-examined and discharged. 2. After this the accused should be called upon to enter upon his defence and produce his evidence. Then should follow the evidence of the remaining witnesses for the prosecution who should then and there be cross-examined and re-examined and discharged. 2. After this the accused should be called upon to enter upon his defence and produce his evidence. If the Magistrate will only study the charge introduced in the law by section 256 and the observations of the select committee upon this section, he will find that the framers of the Code so far from intending that the accused should be allowed to re-summon and cross-examine witnesses, did their very utmost to avoid such harassing procedure. The moment the stage has been reached when there is ground for presuming that an accused has committed an offence triable under Chapter XXI is the critical moment at which the examination of the accused should be taken and the charge sheet drawn up. The Magistrate has adopted the old fashioned and exploded procedure of taking the whole case for the prosecution and then drawing up the charge. Let the record be returned.