H.B. Antani, J.—Rule. Learned Additional Public Prosecutor Ms. Manisha L. Shah waives service of Rule on behalf of the respondent-State and learned Advocate Ms. Shilpa R. Shah waives service of Rule for the respondent-complainant. In the facts and circumstances of the case, the matter is taken up for hearing today.

2. As common question of law is involved in all the three Revision Applications, they are heard together and disposed of by this common judgment.

3. These applications are preferred under Section 397 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973(“the Code”, for short) read with Section 401 of the Code in connection with Special Case No. 22 of 2008 pending before the Special Judge, Fast Track Court No. 1 at Patan. The petitioners are aggrieved by the order passed by the learned Additional Sessions Judge and Presiding Officer, Fast Tract Court, Patan, below Exhibits 53 and 54 by which the application preferred by the accused for framing of the separate charge was dismissed.

4. The main contention in all the Revision Applications preferred by the petitioners is that as the learned Judge has committed gross error in not appreciating the fact that the charge framed against th