Hon ble SINHA, J.—Leave granted.

2. As to whether a trial of a sessions case could have commenced and completed although no cognizance of it could have been taken against the appellants is the question that arises for consideration herein.

3. Before, however, adverting to the said question, we may notice the undisputed fact of the matter.

Appellants were named in a First Information Report for commission of offences under Section 302, 147, 302/149, 324, 326 and 323 of the Indian Penal Code. Subsequently, a charge sheet was submitted on 12.2.1993 wherein they were shown to be absconding. It, however, stands admitted that the investigation against them was not completed. Cognizance of the offence, however, was taken. The case was also committed to the Court of Sessions in terms of Section 209 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Although no cognizance was taken as against the appellants pursuant to or in furtherance of the charge sheet submitted by the Investigating Officer, relying on or on the basis of the order dated 28.4.1993, committing the case to the Sessions Judge, charges were framed against all the five accused named in the First Information Report including the appellants. Appe

Click Here to Read the rest of this document