LAWS(RAJ)-1979-7-50

BANWARI LAL Vs. RAM PARTAP

Decided On July 30, 1979
BANWARI LAL Appellant
V/S
RAM PARTAP Respondents

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard Mr. B. R. Arara, learned counsel for the petitioner and perused the judgment of acquittal passed in this case by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh on Dec. 19, 1978. The petitioner has filed this revision petition against the order of acquittal passed in this case by the Additional Sessions Judge No. 1, Hanumangarh. The State has not come up in appeal after obtaining requisite leave from this Court, although the non-petitioner Nos. 1 and 2 were prosecuted on a police report and were tried by the Additional Sessions Judge, after they had been committed to his Court.

(2.) Upon perusal of the judgment of the Additional Sessions Judge we are satisfied that the non petitioners viz. Rampratap and Maniram were rightly acquitted of the offences under sections 447 and 307, Indian Penal Code and in the alternative under section 307 read with section 34, Indian Panel Code. The trial Judge has given good reasons for not holding both the non petitioners guilty of the aforesaid charges and we see absolutely no reason to take a different view of the evidence led by the prosecution in this case.

(3.) Mr. B. R. Arora could not succeed in showing that the trial Judge committed such an illegality or glaring procedural error in trying the case as may necessitate the order of retrial. He merely contended that the Additional Sessions Judge ought to have tried the cross case simultaneously with this case, and delivered separate judgments on the same day after hearing the arguments in both the cases. In support of his above contention he relied upon the authority of : Kalandi Behera Vs. The State (AIR 1965 Orissa 166) , wherein reliance has been placed on an authority of the Supreme Court in Akhlag Vs. State of U.P. (1962 Mys. L.J., 134) and held on its strength that in cross-cases arising out of the same occurrence both trials should be held separately, but one after the other by the same Judge, who should not deliver the judgments till both the cases are heard and finished.