Back
2021 Supreme(Gau) 625
IN THE HIGH COURT OF GAUHATI
HITESH KUMAR SARMA, J.
Mostafa Sheikh - Petitioner
Versus
Astullah Sheikh and Another - Respondent
Crl. Rev. P. No. 83 of 2021
Decided on : 09-04-2021
Advocate Appeared:
For the Petitioner: Mr. G. Kakoti and Mr. Thakuria
For the Respondents: Ms. S. Jahan
If both the cases have arisen out of the same transaction/incident, it would be appropriate to conduct trial of both the cases by the same court.
Headnote:
Same Transaction/Incident - Criminal Revision Petition - The court held that if both the cases have arisen out of the same transaction/incident, then it would be appropriate to conduct trial of both the cases by the same court. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bilasipara was directed to stay further proceedings in the case until it is satisfied that the other case is out of the same occurrence/cross-case, which needs to be tried by the same court.
Fact of the Case:
The petitioner filed a criminal revision petition challenging the rejection of the prayer made in a Sessions Case. The petitioner argued that a cross case arising out of the same incident should be tried by the same court and requested the trial of the Sessions case to be kept in abeyance until the investigation of the cross case is completed.
Finding of the Court:
The court found that if both the cases have arisen out of the same transaction/incident, it would be appropriate to conduct trial of both the cases by the same court. The learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bilasipara was directed to stay further proceedings in the case until it is satisfied that the other case is out of the same occurrence/cross-case, which needs to be tried by the same court.
Issues: The issue was whether the trial of the Sessions case should be kept in abeyance until the investigation of the cross case is completed, and whether both cases arising out of the same transaction/incident should be tried by the same court.
Ratio Decidendi: The court's decision was based on the principle that if both the cases have arisen out of the same transaction/incident, it would be appropriate to conduct trial of both the cases by the same court.
Final Decision: The petition stands disposed of with the direction to the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bilasipara to stay further proceedings in the case until it is satisfied that the other case is out of the same occurrence/cross-case, which needs to be tried by the same court.
JUDGMENT :
1. This is a criminal revision petition filed under section 397/401 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, challenging the legality and propriety of the order dated 4.1.2021 passed by the learned Additional Session Judge, Bilasipara in Sessions Case No. 51/2019 whereby the prayer made in the Petition No. 2103/2020 filed by the petitioner in the said Sessions Case No. 51/2019 was rejected.
Heard Mr. G. Kakati, learned counsel for the petitioner. Also heard Ms. S. Jahan, learned Additional Public Prosecutor, Assam appearing on behalf of State respondent No. 2.
2. It has been submitted by the learned counsel for the petitioner that a cross case being Sapatgram P.S. Case No. 134 of 2014, was registered on the basis of the FIR filed by the petitioner in connection with the same incident upon which charge sheet has been laid and trial of Sessions Case No. 51/2019 is going on in the Court of learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bilasipara.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that since the aforesaid Sapatgram P.S. Case No. 134 of 2014 had arisen out of the same transaction/incident, the said case along with the Session Case, referred to above, ought to have been tried by the same Court. It has also been submitted by learned counsel for the petitioner that in the aforesaid Sapatgram P.S. Case No. 134 of 2014, neither charge sheet has been laid nor final report has been submitted. Therefore, he has submitted that the trial of the Session case be kept in abeyance till investigation of the case in the aforesaid Sapatgram P.S. Case No. 134 of 2014 is completed either way.
4. In the considered view of this court, if both the cases have arisen out of the same transaction/incident, then it would be appropriate to conduct trial of both the cases by the same court.
5. Taking this view of the matter, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bilasipara shall stay further proceedings in the aforesaid case until he is satisfied that the Sapatgram P.S. Case No. 134 of 2014 is out of the same occurrence/cross-case, which needs to be tried by the same court. To ascertain the said fact and to satisfy himself, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Bilasipara shall take appropriate steps/action to collect the report, etc.
6. A copy of this order be placed before the learned court below by the petitioner.
With the above observations and directions, this petition stands disposed of.
