G. Narendar, J.

Criminal Petition No. 200710/2015 is preferred being aggrieved by the Order dated 16.6.2015 rendered in S.C. No. 58/2010 on the application preferred by the present petitioner under the provisions of Sections 278(1) and (2) of Cr.P.C. and also under Section 327(2) of the Cr.P.C.

2. The petitioner is the defacto complainant and is none other than the father of the victim who is said to have been sexually assaulted by the respondent-accused herein.

3. The gist of complaint is that while the petitioner’s daughter/victim, who is charge sheet witness No. 2 and has deposed as PW6 was on her way to attend to her tuition classes in the 3rd week of October, 2005, at about 6.30 P.M. the tyre of her scooty motor cycle suffered a puncture and as there was no one nearby and as she was waiting, the accused came in a car and passed her by. Thereafter they turned the car around and came and stopped the vehicle very near to her. Suddenly the first accused is alleged to have tightly held on to her mouth and dragged her towards the car. Thereafter the other accused held her legs and she was bodily lifted and forced into the car. It is further alleged that the first accused stuffed cloth into her mouth and tied it around to prevent her from raising an alarm and another accused tied her legs and an other tied her hands and she was driven to a desolate spot on the outer ring road where the 1st accused is alleged to have indulged in sexual perversions and committed the offence of rape and that the victim was further threatened that if she revealed this fact to anybody or to the police, her family would be finished off.

4. It is also alleged that subsequently the accused in SC No. 59/2010, taking advantage of the situation intimidated her and forced her to accompany him to Bengaluru and is said to have committed forcible rape upon her and is also said to have kept her in a lodge and thereafter confined her in Al-Huda Girls Hostel at Bengaluru between 9.3.2006 to 15.3.2006.

5. The complaint came to be lodged on 08/09.3.2006 and came to be registered as Crime No. 31/06 and initially was registered for the offences punishable under Sections 363, 504 and 506 r/w. 34 of the IPC and later the complainant agitated by the tardy investigation approached the higher ups in the department including the DGP and also lodged a complaint with the then Hon’ble Chief Minister, Home Minister and DGP on account of which the investigation was handed over to the COD, Bengaluru. The COD after investigation have now submitted charge sheet for offences punishable under Sections 366(A), 376, 506, 114 and 120(B) of the IPC in SC No. 58/2010. The commission of the offences prior to 08/09.3.2006 and the commission of the offence after the said date is said to have been revealed on account of the investigation pursuant to registration of the complaint dated 9.3.2006 which is registered as Crime No. 31/2006. Hence, two separate charge sheets have been filed as the result of the single complaint. The accused in SC 59/2010 has been charged under Sections 366(A), 376 and 342 of IPC. The committal order in the 2 cases came to passed 20.1.2010 and 18.01.2010 by the III Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.dn.) and JMFC Gulbarga in CC No. 541/2008 and CC No. 2404/2009. In SC 58/2010, 33 witnesses are arrayed and in S.C. 59/2010, 39 witnesses are arrayed to be examined on behalf of the prosecution.

6. After committal it appears that the Learned Public Prosecutor is said to have filed a memo praying for clubbing of both the cases as the complainant and the victim are one and same in both the cases and witnesses are also common and prayed for common trial. The memo came to be filed on 15.11.2011. The Counsel for A3 in SC 58/2010 submitted his no objection for the clubbing of the case, whereas Counsel for A1, A2 and A4 alone submitted their objections to the memo and objected to the clubbing of the cases. The Trial Court i.e. the Court of the Principal Sessions Judge by its detailed Order