MADAN GOPAL ALIAS BALIA Vs. STATE OF RAJASTHAN

JUDGEMENT

(1.) THIS is a reference made by the learned Addl. Sessions Judge No 2, Jodhpur with a recommendation that the order of the Addl. Munsiff-Magistrate No. 1, Jodhpur City, dated 20-3-1973, by which a criminal cnse (No. 149 of 1972 Madan Gopal vs. Nand Kishore, under secs. 330, 331, 327, 367, 307 & 120-B I. P. C ) instituted on a complaint was amalgamated with criminal case No. 12 of 1972 (State vs. Nand Kishore and others, under secs. 342, 323 and 330, I. P. C.) instituted on a police report relating to the same occurrence, may be set aside and the learned Magistrate may be directed to hold separate trials in both the cases without consolidating them.

(2.) THE reference arises under the following circumstances - Madan Gopal alias Balia son of Amba Lal glod-smith lodged a report with the police on 3-4-71 at 7-30 P. M. at police station, Khanda Phalsa that on that date he was taken inside the room of Nand Kishore and was beaten by Gopi, Shanker, Kishori Lal and Nand Kishore with a log a wood upon his denial to dishonestly misappropriate some gold while preparing a chain for Nand Kishore It was further alleged that the complainant was made naked, tortured and unlawfully detained during the period between 2 30 p. m. and 6. 00 or 6. 15 p. m. On the basis of the above report, the police registered a criminal case under sec. 342, I. P. C and after making usual investigation put up a challan against six accused, namely, Nand Kishore, Kripa Shanker, Ram Swaroop, Kishori Lal, Bhanwar Lal and Gauri Shanker son of Ramdas in the court of the Addl. Munsiff-Magistrate No 1, Jodhpur City. Meanwhile Madan Gopal filed a complaint also against five out of the aforesaid six persons and five others, namely, Gauri Shanker, Kedar, Tulsi Ram, Gopi Kishan and Madan Kandi for offences under secs. 330, 331, 327, 367, 307 and 120-B I. P. C. . on which cognizance was taken and process was issued to the accused persons for offences under secs, 330, 342 and 367, I. P. C. only. Later on, upon an application of the accused persons both the cases were amalgamated by the learned Magistrate on the grounds that separate trials would cause harassment to the accused persons and inconvenience to the witnesses who may be required to attend the court twice for the purpose of giving evidence in both the cases.