JUDGMENT : B. Kemal Pasha, J. 1. Together with a request to recall PW-4, PW-13 and PW-16, who are cited as defence witnesses 1 to 3 in the list, the defence wanted to examine witness No. 8 K.V. Sujatha, who was allegedly the wife of PW-42. 2. The learned Senior Counsel for the petitioner has presently requested for a permission to examine those witnesses in the list. As far as the recalling of PW-4, PW-13 and PW-16 is concerned, this Court is of the view that there is absolutely nothing to interfere with the impugned order passed by the court below. 3. Regarding the examination of witness No. 8 K.V. Sujatha, the court below has found that it is barred under Section 153 of the Indian Evidence Act. The learned defence counsel has pointed out that in all situations it cannot be said that such an examination of a witness to contradict another witness is not barred under Section 153 of the Indian Evidence Act; whereas, the bar comes into play only when questions to shake the credit or credibility of a witness were put to that witness by injuring his character. 4. Presently, the evidence tendered by PW-42 is not available before this Court. The court below shall examine whether the bar under Section 153 of the Indian Evidence Act is there for the examination of witness No. 8 K.V. Sujatha. The learned Special Judge has to consider the question whether any questions to shake the credit of PW-42 were put by injuring his character. If no such questions were put to PW-42, witness No. 8 can be permitted to be examined to contradict him on other matters. It is for the court below to take a decision in the matter. The impugned order, so far as it relates to the examination of witness No. 8 alone in the defence witness list, is quashed. The said aspect alone is remitted to the court below for taking a fresh decision in the matter. 5. Crl. M.C. is disposed of as above.