( 1 ) THE question raised in this case is whether the trial of Petitioners for offences alleged by the respondent in C. C, No, 158/1954 on the file of the Munsif-Magistrate, Bhadravati, is barred by virtue of the proceedings in C. C. No-951/53 in the same Court. In the latter case the Petitioners as well as the Respondent were accused of committing affray, an offence under Section 160, I. P. C. , convicted of the said offence and sentenced to pay a fine" of Rs. 20/- each. The Respondent now wants the Petitioners to be dealt with according to law for causing him hurt. Objection was taken to this on the ground that the facts relating to both cases are common and the offences alleged though different are those committed in the course of the same transaction. The contention in the lower Court and repeated here by Sri Gular Sreenivasa Rao on behalf of the accused is that provisions of Section 403, Criminal P. C. and Article 20 of the Constitution of india operate as a bar to the case being proceeded with. Article 20 states that no person shall be prosecuted and convicted for the same offence more than once; and according to Section 403, criminal P. C:

"a person who has once been tried b

Click Here to Read the rest of this document