Noticed.

The petition in Crl.M.P. No. 4780/97 in Crl. Appeal No. 677/97 is filed under S. 482 of Cr.P.C. by the All India Democratic Womens Association, Tamil Nadu Unit, represented by its Assistant Secretary V. Vasuki to permit the petitioner Association to intervene in the application filed by the prosecution to cancel the bail in Crl.M.P. No. 4571 of 1997 in Crl. Appeal No. 677/97

2. The petitioner in Crl.M.P. No. 4781/97 in Women Lawyers Association at Madras represented by its Secretary K. Santhakumari and the above petition is filed under S. 482 of Cr.P.C. to permit the petitioner-Association to intervene in the application filed by the prosecution to cancel the bail in Crl.M.P. No. 4571 of 1997 in Crl. Appeal No. 677/97

3. Both these petitions are opposed by the learned counsel for the accused viz., the respondents 2 to 5 herein

4. After hearing the learned counsel for the petitioners in both petitions filed under S. 482 of Cr.P.C. and after hearing the learned counsel for the respondents 2 to 5/accused, the point that arises for determination is as to whether the petitioners can be permitted to intervene in the application to cancel the bail filed by the prosecution in Crl.M.P. No. 4571 of 1997 during the pendency of the appeal in Crl. Appeal No. 677 of 1997

5. Point :- The State represented by the Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, CID-I, Chennai was the Investigating Officer, and after investigation the charge sheet was filed, and the charges were framed by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Cuddalore in Sessions Case No. 99 of 1993 for the offences under Ss. 343, 348, 324, 330, 376, 218 and 220 read with S. 109 of I.P.C

6. All the accused persons, totally 11 accused persons, were involved in Sessions Case No. 99 of 1993 on the file of the Principal Sessions Judge, Cuddalore. Out of the total 11 accused, six accused were charged for the offence of rape of one Padmini, while she was in custody in the police station, and they are A1 to A3, A6, A8 and A10, and they were alleged to have committed the offence of rape on the said Padmini, and out of six accused persons charged for the offence of rape under S. 376 of I.P.C., four were convicted and they are A3, A6, A8 and A10, while A1 and A2 were acquitted for the offence of rape on the said Padmini by the learned Principal Sessions Judge, Cuddalore in his Judgment dated 4-9-1997. But A1 and A2 were convicted for the offence of wrongful confinement of the said Padmini even though they were acquitted for the offence of rape on the said Padmini. Aggrieved against the Judgment of conviction and sentence A1 and A2 filed a separate appeal in Crl. Appeal No. 680/97, while so the accused A3, A6, A8 and A10 filed a separate appeal in Crl. Appeal No. 677 of 1997. During the pendency of the Crl. Appeal No. 677/97 the accused viz., A3, A6, A8 and A10 filed an application under S. 389(1) of Cr.P.C. to suspend the sentence of 10 years passed against them for the offence of rape and to suspend the sentence for the other offences and to release them on bail in Crl.M.P. No. 4472 of 1997, and by an order dated 11-9-1997 the sentences imposed on them were suspended by this Court and they were granted bail. Thereupon the State represented by the Superintendent of Police, Crime Branch, CID-I, Chennai, who is the Investigating Agency, has filed an application in Crl.M.P. No. 4571 of 1997 to cancel the bail granted to A3, A6, A8 and A10 in Crl.M.P. No. 4472 of 1997 consequent to the suspension of sentence. During the pendency of the petition for cancellation of bail in Crl.M.P. No. 4571 of 1997, the petitioners Associations have filed these two petitions under S. 482 of Cr.P.C. to intervene in the petition filed by the prosecution to cancel the bail in Crl.M.P. No. 4571 of 1997. The Petitioners Associations are third parties to the Sessions Case No. 99 of 1993 and also to the consequential Criminal Appeals and the Criminal Miscellaneous Petitions. In other words the Petitioners Associ