RAJATULLYA PAIKAR Vs. KHUDA KARIGAR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) TWO cross cases (viz., Emperor V/s. Khudia Karigar and Ors. and Nafar Mandal V/s. Rajatulla Paikar and Ors.) had been committed to the Court of Session, one set up by the police and the other started on the complaint of Nafar Mandal and others who are the persons accused in the police case. The police case was committed first; but it was decided to try the later case first and objection was raised by both parties in the two cases. The learned Sessions Judge has now ordered that the police case shall be tried first and, if possible, that both cases shall be tried by the same Judge. In our opinion, this is a proper order. But we would add that the latter case ought to be tried immediately after the termination of the police case, and if there is no objection to the jury by either of the parties, the second case may be tried by the same jurors who try the police case. There is no legal bar to this procedure, because Section 272, Criminal P.C., makes it clear that the same jury may try any number of accused persons one after the other. But, of course, the accused in any trial has the right provided by the Code to object to the jury or any one or more of the members of the jury. The petitioner had asked the Sessions Judge to make an order that two cases should be tried simultaneously and by the same tribunal and the learned Judge remarked that there was an insuperable legal bar to the two cases being heard by the same set of jurors. Obviously be meant that there is no provision in the Code for trying two cases at the same time before the same jurors and this undoubtedly is correct. Therefore subject to these observations, the rule is discharged.