LACHHAMAN PRADHAN Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The accused persons in S. T. Case No. 110/458 of 1994 pending in the file of C.J.M.-cum-Assistant Sessions Judge, Khurda, have filed this application under Section 482, Code of Criminal Procedure (hereinafter referred to as the "Code") challenging the validity of the order dated 8-2-1996 in the said case.

(2.) The petitioners are facing trial under Sections 341/294/324/307/34, Indian Penal Code. The trial of the case is concluded and after hearing arguments, the case had been posted for judgment. At that stage, the trial Court passed an order that the judgment in the case shall not be pronounced until disposal of G. R. Case No. 3566 of 1993 which should be heard by the same Court after receipt of the record from the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar, where it was pending. The aforesaid order was passed by the trial Court on the footing that both the cases should have been tried at one trial in accordance with Section 219 of the Code.

(3.) In the Sessions Trial case, there are seven accused persons who are facing trial for the offences alleged to have been committed on 16-8-1993. In G. R. Case No. 3566 of 1993 pending before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, Bhubaneswar, the alleged occurrence took place on 17-8-1993. Though the seven petitioners facing trial in the Sessions case are also the accused persons in the said G. R. Case No. 3566 of 1993 pending before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate, there are four other accused persons. In other words, all the accused persons are not same in both the cases. Moreover, the alleged offences which are the subject-matter of trial in the G. R. case before the Sub-Divisional Judicial Magistrate are under Sections 323/354/294/427/506/34, Indian Penal Code. The trial Court observed that the offence under Section 294, Indian Penal Code; was common in both the cases and, therefore, opined that both the cases should be tried together at one trial under Section 219 of the Code.