J. P. DESAI, J. ( 1 ) BEFORE parting with this case we are constrained to observe that during the cross-examination of Sarojben sister of the deceased some questions were put to her touching her character and conduct but without any material to substantiate the same. It was suggested to her that she was prosecuted for indecent behaviour on a public road and sentenced on 17th December 1979 to pay fine which suggestion she denied. She was again questioned whether applications were made against her alleging therein that when she was residing in the house of one Jahurmal she was indulging in undesirable activities and she stated that she did not know. There is no material on record to show that there was any substance in either of these suggestions. This shows that suggestions were made in cross-examination without any material to substantiate the same. This was very unfair to the witness. The learned advocate for the defence should not have put such questions without having material to substantiate the same and the learned Additional Sessions Judge with due respect to him should not have allowed such questions to be put to the witness. Any such questions touching the character and conduct of a witness should be asked only when there is some material to substantiate the same and the Court should also see that such questions are not put unless there is some material to substantiate the same. Appeal dismissed. .