GYANSING PRABHATSINGH Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THE main point argued in this revision application is that two persons, viz., the driver of a motor-car and the driver of a motor-truck coming from different directions collided and they were tried in one tfial for offences under Sections. 279 and 304A I.P.C. and therefore the trial is bad. THE contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner is correct in view of the provisions of Section 239 Cr. P. C. In such a case it cannot be said that there is one transaction in which different offences have been eommttted. THE conviction and sentence of the petitioner are, therefore, set aside and a re-trial is ordered.