BABURAO HARI PAWAR Vs. STATE OF MAHARASHTRA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Seven accused are being tried before the Sessions Judge, Raigad in Sessions Case No. 115 of 1984 for offences under Ss.120B, 143, 147, 148, 302 read with Ss.149, 302 read with S.34, 307 read with S.149 and accused 1, the present petitioner is also charged under S.201, I.P.C. Out of those accused, accused 1 has preferred this petition by way of revision under S.401, Cr. P.C. read with S.482, Cr. P.C. and Art.227 of the Constitution.

(2.) It appears that in the said trial, charges against all the accused were framed on 12th April 1985 and case has been now posted for evidence at the trial. It also appears that at the time of framing of charges, the Advocate appearing on behalf of accused 1 was not present and hence there was no opportunity for the Counsel to argue on behalf of the petitioner that the Police papers and the charge-sheet itself did not disclose any sufficient grounds for proceeding against accused 1, the petitioner.

(3.) Subsequently, an application came to be filed before the Sessions Judge few days before the regular trial was to commence. That application was presented on behalf of the petitioner accused 1 claiming discharge from the proceedings. The said application was disposed of by the learned Sessions Judge by his order below Ext. 26 passed on 9th April 1986. The learned Sessions Judge on hearing the petitioner's Counsel and the Public Prosecutor came to the conclusion that firstly the Police papers indicated that accused 1 was present at the time of the offence and was in the know of the incident and therefore there was enough material to proceed against the said accused. Secondly, he also concluded that this application could not be entertained at such a late stage when regular evidence was also to commence. He, therefore, rejected the application for discharge filed by accused 1. It is this order dt. 7th July 1986 which is impugned in the present petition.