( 1 ) RAJESHBHAI Chandubhai and others, applicants-original accused have filed this Criminal Revision Application under Sec. 397 read with sec. 401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as code) challenging the order dated 19th December, 2000, passed by learned sessions Judge, Bharuch in Sessions Case No. 130 of 1999. The petitioners have also challenged the order of learned Sessions Judge dated 19th October, 2000, passed below Exh. 37 deposition of Maheshbhai Natvarbhai, order dated 9th november, 2000, passed below Exh. 38 - deposition of Gautam Shanabhai Vasai and order dated 9th November, 2000, passed below Exh. 39 - deposition of manojbhai Ravjibhai Patel also. So in all, the petitioners have challenged the aforesaid four orders of the learned Sessions Judge, Bharuch. The learned Judge by the said orders was pleased to reject the application filed by the accused at Exh. 55 filed under Sec. 311 of the Cr. P. C. for recalling the three prosecution witnesses for contradicting them with their respective police statements and prove the same and to grant permission for cross-examination in connection with those and other related facts.

( 2 ) THE facts giving rise to this application are as under :2. 1 The applicants-accused are being tried by the learned Sessions Judge, bharuch for the offences punishable under Secs. 147, 148, 149, 326, 324 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police act. The charge against the accused was that on 29-9-1998 at about 1-00 a. m. in Bhaliyavad in Bharuch formed an unlawful assembly whose common object was to cause grievous and simple hurt to various prosecution witnesses and at that time they were armed with various weapons like pipe, sticks, sword, wooden handle etc. It was further submitted that in pursuance thereof the accused caused grievous hurt to Gautam Shanabhai, Manojbhai Ravjibhai, Rajeshbhai Vinodbhai, vinodbhai Shanabhai and Maheshbhai Natvarbhai, and it has been registered as sessions Case No. 130 of 1999. 2. 2 The applicants-accused have also stated that the learned Sessions Judge has also tried another cross-case being Sessions Case No. 33 of 1999. In that case, there was offence punishable under Secs. 147, 148, 149, 302, 307, 120-B of the Indian Penal Code and also under Sec. 135 of the Bombay Police act against nine accused. It has been stated that out of this nine accused, six injured prosecution witnesses (which are stated earlier) are also the accused and there are (other prosecution witnesses whose names are mentioned earlier and three prosecution witnesses) namely Kanubhai Chhanabhai, Tino Chhanabhai and pravinchandra Vinodchandra. It has been stated that they were prosecuted on the charge that they on 29-9-1998 at about the same time and place formed an unlawful assembly and in pursuance of the conspiracy hatched went armed with knife, pipe, sticks and other deadly weapons and accused Vinod Shanabhai inflicted knife blow to Jiteshbhai Sakarlal, brother of the applicant No. 2 chandrakant Sakarlal on the left side of his chest which resulted in his death and also voluntarily caused hurt to applicant No. 1 Rajeshbhai Chandubhai and the applicant No. 2 Chandrakant Sakarlal and it has been registered as Sessions case No. 33 of 1999. 2. 3 The learned Counsel for petitioners has submitted that the applicants during the trial of Sessions Case No. 130 of 1999, the prosecution examined sixteen witnesses including the Investigating Officer P. I. Shri G. N. Chavda. The prosecution examined all the above-named six injured eye-witnesses. However, during the course of their evidence, three of them namely prosecution witness No. 13 Maheshbhai Natvarbhai (Exh. 37), prosecution witness No. 14 gautam Shanabhai (Exh. 38), prosecution witness No. 15 Manojbhai Ravjibhai (Exh. 39) did not support the prosecution version on material particulars and so they were treated hostile. The learned Sessions Judge permitted the learne