NAAYANASA BHIMASA PAWAR Vs. JAWAHARLAL SHANOMIKSA ARISIDDI

JUDGEMENT

(1.) the complainants in c.c. 452 and 598 of 1990 on the file of the additional chief judicial magistrate, dharwad have preferred these revision petitions challenging the common order of acquittal recorded in both the cases. The state has not preferred any appeal against these orders.

(2.) the two cases are case and counter arising from the same incident stated to have taken place on 30-1-1990 is the undisputed case of both the parties. The common grievance ventilated by both the learned advocates who appear for the petitioners is, that the learned chief judicial magistrate was wholly in error in passing a common judgment in both the cases and that he has freely made use of the evidence in one case for appreciating the case of the prosecution in the other and the same is impermissible in law and on this ground itself the order of acquittal recorded in two cases is liable to be set aside.

(3.) that the learned chief judicial magistrate has passed acommon judgment is not in dispute. The very copy of the order produced in the case shows that the learned magistrate has passed a common judgment that he has made use of the evidence adduced in one case for the purpose of appreciating the other case is also not in dispute. In paragraph 10 of his judgment, while referring to the case putforward in c.c. No. 452 of 1990 this is what the learned magistrate has observed: