AI Structured Summary
Not yet generated for this judgment
Judgment
B.A. Zaidi, J.
A Sessions Trial No. 232 of 2000, State v. Prabhu Nath and Nine others, arising out of Case Crime No. 484 of 1999 Police Station Bansi, District Siddarth Nagar, under sections 147, 323, 308, 504, 506 IPC and section 3(1) (x) S.C. and S.T. Act, in which opposite party No. 2 Ram Charan is the complainant, is at the stage of 313 Cr.P.C. and other Sessions Trial No. 129 of 2003, State v. Ram Charan and others, under sections 147, 149, 323, 325, 504, 506 IPC, Police Station Kotwali Bansi District Siddarth Nagar, in which the FIR was lodged by Prabhu Nath applicant No. 4, it appears that even the casedairy and FIR have been received from the Court of Judicial Magistrate i.e. committal Court and in its absence, the trial has not commenced.
2 Heard Ms. Afshan Shafaut, Advocate for the applicants and Sri D.K. Tiwari, Additional Government Advocate for the State.
The law is that in the cases, where there are crossversions, the cases should be decided simultaneously and the trial must commence in quick succession of each other. As will appear from the circumstances mentioned above, the Trial Court is not adhering the prescribed procedure. The Trial Court is, therefore, advised that it will ensure the receipt of the casediary and FIR in sessions trial No. 129 of 2003 from the trial Magistrate and will proceed with the trial and after the trial is over, arguments in both the trial will be heard and both the cases will be decided simultaneously.
Application under section 407 disposed of accordingly.