DINESH C JAIN Vs. SIDHARTHA IMPEX HYDERABAD

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This criminal revision case is directed against the order, dated 3.12.2012, passed in CC No. 204 of 2012 on the file of X Special Magistrate, Hyderabad, whereby and whereunder the learned Magistrate ordered for trial in CC Nos. 204, 205 and 206 of 2012 simultaneously. The petitioner is the accused and the 1st respondent is the complainant in CC No. 204 of 2012. The accused filed Crl. MP No. 1961 of 2012 under Section 219 Cr.PC for clubbing CC Nos. 205 and 206 of 2012 with CC No. 204 of 2012 and conduct common trial. The learned X Special Magistrate, Hyderabad, by order, dated 22.11.2012, directed for common trial in all the three Calendar Cases since the parties as well as the offence in all the three cases are one and the same. For better appreciation, I may refer the relevant portion of the order, dated 22.11.2012 and it is thus:

(2.) Heard Sri G, Srinivas, learned Counsel appearing for the petitioner/accused and Sri E. Manohar, learned Senior Counsel representing Sri P. Kamalakar, learned Counsel appearing for the 1st respondent/complainant.

(3.) As seen from the material placed on record, the learned X Special Magistrate, Hyderabad, passed an order, dated 22.11.2012, in Crl. MP No. 1961 of 2012 for trial in all the three cases together. The complainant did not choose to question the said order. But, the learned X Special Magistrate without noticing the order, dated 22.11.2012, passed in Crl. MP No. 1961 of 2012, proceeded to order trial in all the three cases simultaneously. The docket order, dated 3.12.2012, is contrary to the order, dated 22.11.2012, passed in Crl. MP No. 1961 of 2012.