ANIL BHASKAR SONAVANE Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a revision application by the complainant whose application for commitment of criminal case No. 980/P of 1974 pending on the file of the Metropolitan Magistrate, 12th Court, Bandra, was rejected by the learned Magistrate.

(2.) VERY few facts may be noted for the purpose of disposing of this revision application :

(3.) IN the other case charges include Sections 147, 148, 149 read with Section 824, Indian Penal Code. The complainant applied to the Magistrate that even this case be committed to the Court of Session because though the Magistrate undoubtedly had the power to try the case in respect of the charges contained in the charge -sheet, the rule of procedure has been laid down by this Court in the interest of justice requiring a particular type of trial of cases arising out of cross -complaints. When two cases arise on the basis of cross -complaints based upon the same incident, it is laid down by this High Court that it is desirable in the interest of justice that both the cases are heard one after the other by the same presiding Judge and judgments are delivered after the completion of hearing in both the cases. This will avoid the possible contingency of conflicting findings being given. Of course, a reminder is included in the judgments of this Court that each case must be decided on the evidence led on the record of that case and the Magistrate shall not use evidence in one case as evidence in the other.