JAGDISH SINGH Vs. STATE OF HIMACHAL PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) I have just now rejected another petition (Criminal Revision No. 48 of 1989, Jagdish Singh v. State of H.P.) by a detailed judgement holding that the charge under Ss.379/167/218/467/468/471/120-B, I.P.C. read with S.5(1)(d) of the Prevention of Corruption Act, 1954, framed by the Special Judge, Shimla, against the petitioners and the pro forma respondents is legally justifiable.

(2.) Now, by this petition, these petitioners seek to challenge the order of Special Judge, Shimla, dated 29-5-1989, apparently to stall the trial of the case fixed from June 19, 1989 to June 30, 1989 on day to day basis, alleging that the decision of the Special Judge to conduct a joint trial of the petitioners with the other co-accused was legally impermissible. The petitioners allege that they cannot be jointly tried with the other accused as there is no nexus or connection between them and the co-accused in this case. It is further submitted that learned Special Judge was influenced by the decision of the Supreme Court (Criminal Appeal No. 67 of 1987 decided on 5-2-1987, AIR 1987 SC 773, State of H.P. v. Krishan Lal Pardhan on the point of conspiracy alleged to have taken place between the petitioners and other co-accused in this case.

(3.) A perusal of the impugned order discloses that the learned Special Judge has looked into the facts of this case before concluding that the accused are connected along with others in the commission of the offences against them. It has not been pointed out as to how the provisions of S.223 of the Code of Criminal Procedure are not applicable in the present case. It is relevant to reproduce S.223 of the Code of Criminal Procedure :-