1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY APPELLATE SIDE CRIMINAL APPLICATION NO.1215 OF 2008 Union of India : Applicant (Orig.Complainant) V/s. Ahmed T.P. @ Mamminha Pallikunhi & Anr. : Respondents (Orig. Accused) ... Mrs.A.S.Pai for the applicant. Mr.H.E. Mooman for respondent no.1. Mr.S.N.Gawade, Addl. Public Prosecutor for the State. ... CORAM : S.A. BOBDE, J. DATE : AUGUST 6, 2009. P.C.: The applicant has challenged the order of the Special Judge under the N.D.P.S. Act by which the learned trial Court has rejected the prosecution’s application for permission to put questions under section 154 of the Evidence Act to a witness called by it. The application was made in respect of a panch witness who stated:- “powder was taken in another room for testing purpose, after my signature was obtained. I do 2 not know from where and how the bags containing powder came from.” The trial Court has come to the conclusion upon reading the entire evidence, the aforesaid statement cannot be said to be a statement by which the witness has reasiled from any an earlier statement. In fact, I have gone through the examination-in-chief of P.W.6 i.e. the witness in question and there does not appear to be anything in the evidence from which it can be said that the witness has resiled in cross-examination. Thus, there is no reason to interfere with the order of the trial Court rejecting the application for permission to cross-examine. 2. The application is dismissed. S.A. BOBDE, J.