Judgement

SEN, J. :- The question involved in this appeal by special leave is whether the High Court of Karnataka was justified in directing the Sessions Judge, Bidar to proceed with the trial of Sessions Case No. 23 of 1984 insofar as it relates to respondent Narsa Reddy and one Vaijinath, accused 2, arraigned for having committed alleged offences punishable under Ss. 302 and 201 both read with S. 34, Penal Code, 1860 and Ss. 3 and 4, Dowry Prohibition Act, 1961.

2. While issuing notice, we were not satisfied about the legality and propriety of the order passed by the learned Single Judge which had the effect of splitting up of the trial although the prosecution case against the accused arose out of the same incident and the evidence to be led by the prosecution against them was more or less common. It also seemed to us that if the order passed by the learned Single Judge were to be implemented the learned Sessions Judge would be constrained to proceed against the respondent and accused 2 Vaijinath and thereby the very object of directing de novo trial would be frustrated. At the hearing, no one appeared for the respondent and therefore we did not have the benefit of hearing his cou