The judicial principle disallows consolidating cases with contradictory accounts to ensure fair trials and prevent confusion.

1. Invoking inherent jurisdiction under S.482, CrPC the two accused persons of S.T. No. 334/2003 (State v. Vinod Singh @ Badal and 4 Others) have called in question the legality of the order dated 17-11-2005 passed in S. T. No. 329/2005 (State through CBI v. Amit Jogi and 30 Others) whereby the two Sessions Trials having diametrically opposite versions have been directed to be consolidated by the 3rd Addl. Sessions Judge, Raipur (C.G.).

2. The brief facts are that one Ram Avtar Jaggi, a leader of National Congress party was shot at 11.40 p.m. on 4-6-2003 and in this connection, a First Information Report was lodged in P. S. Moudhapara, Raipur vide FIR No. 104/2003 for the offences under S.447 and S.307, IPC. This FIR was lodged at the instance of V. K. Pandey, the Station House Officer, P.S. Moudhapara Raipur. Ram Avtar Jaggi was then sent to Macahara Hospital, Raipur, where he died. On 5-6-2003, at 2.15 a.m. another report vide F.I.R. No. 105/2003 was again registered for the same incident under S.302, IPC on the instance of one Satish Jaggi, son of the deceased. Thereafter, five accused persons namely Vinod Singh, Avinash Singh, Jamwant Kashyap, Shyam Sunder and Vishwanath Rajbhar were arrested in connection with Crime No. 104/2003 by the State Police and a charge sheet was filed against them before the concerned Court. Later on, the case was committed to the Court of Sessions and the learned Sessions Judge, Raipur, made over this case to the Court of 9th Addl. Sessions Judge, Raipur on 15-10-2003 for its lawful disposal. This was ultimately registered as S. T. No. 334/2003. It appears that during the course of trial, an application under S. 173(8), CrPC was moved by the Addl. Public Prosecutor for allowing a further investigation in the said case. This application was allowed and further investigation was permitted. Thereafter, on the instance of the State Government, this matter was handed over to the CBI for further investigation and CBI then registered Crime No. R.C - 1 / S / 2004, dated 22-1-2004 under S.120B, S.302 and S.427, IPC and S.25/27 of the Arms Act. It is stated that though the further investigation was permitted but the proceedings of the Sessions Trial No. 334/2003 pending in the Court of 9th A.S.J., Raipur was not stayed and ultimately out of 21 cited prosecution witnesses, 18 were examined in the aforesaid trial. However, by that time, the investigation permitted was complete and the CBI filed another charge sheet against 31 persons, including the 5 accused persons of S.T. No. 334/2003, under S.120B, S.302, S.427 and S.201/34, IPC and S.25/27 of the Arms Act. This case was also committed to the Court of sessions on 8-9-2005. The learned Sessions Judge, Raipur, after committal, made over this case for trial to the Court of 3rd A.S.J., Raipur, (different Court than the earlier Court) which was ultimately registered as S.T. No. 329/2005.

3. It is very important to mention that in the Sessions Trial No. 334/2003, in which the charge sheet was filed by the State Police, the prosecution case is that these petitioners and three other coaccused persons committed murder of deceased Ram Avtar Jaggi and the motive for the murder is said to be the robbery. Whereas in the subsequent Sessions Trial No. 329/2005, in which the charge sheet was filed by the C.B.I. the prosecution case is that the deceased Ram Avtar Jaggi was shot dead by accused Chiman Singh for political reasons as a rally was organized by the National Congress Party in Raipur on 10-6-2003 by Ram Avtar Jaggi and it was reported that lakhs of people are gathering in the said rally at Raipur and this posed a political threat to the then Chief Minister Shri Ajit Jogi and his son Amit Jogi and the m