Gopal Krishna Sharma, J. - (1.)DB Criminal Appeals Nos. 225/82 & 120/80 have been preferred by Jalal, Bheru and Mohan appellants against the judgements of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kota, dated 29th Feb., 1980 in Sessions Case No. 52/1978, whereby, they have been found guilty under Sections 302/149 & 148, IPC; whereas DB Criminal Appeal No. 41/1982 has been preferred by Ikram and Abdul Kalam, against the judgement of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kota, dated 19th Jan., 1982, where by, they have been found guilty under Sections 302/149, and 148 IPC, in Sessions Case No. 17/1981.
(2.)The police submitted a challan against 13 persons including all the accused-appellants mentioned above; and a case was registered in the court of Additional Sessions Judge as Sessions Case No. 52/1978. After charge-sheeting against all the accused persons including the appellants the learned Additional Sessions Judge started recording prosecution evidence. The prosecution closed its evidence on J 9th Nov., 1979. On this date, all the accused persons except Abdul Aziz, were present in the Court. Accused Abdul Aziz was absent on the previous date, i.e. on 13th Sept., 1979 also. All the other accused persons including the present appellants were present on 13th Sept., 1979. On that date, the learned Additional Sessions Judge passed an order under Sec. 317 (2), Cr. PC and separated the case of Abdul Aziz from, the other accused persons. Up to 13th Sept., 1979, the prosecution examined only 16 witnesses. The remaining 4 were examined by the prosecution on various dates in the absence of Abdul Aziz accused, and closed its evidence on 13th Nov., 1979. Thus, the entire prosecution evidence was recorded by learned Additional Sessions Judge in the presence of the accused persons including the present appellants. When the case was fixed for final arguments, accused-appellants Ikram and Abdul Kalam remained absent; and on 20th Feb., 1980, the learned Additional Sessions Judge passed an order against these two accused persons Ikrsm and Abdul Kalam under Sec. 317 (2), Crimial P.C. and separated their case also from the other accused persons. Hence, the learned Additional Sessions Judge, after hearing the arguments in Sessions Case No. 52/1982 gave his judgement on 29th Feb., 1980. Later on, accused Abdul Aziz, Ikram and Abdul Kalam appeared before the learned Additional Sessions Judge. As the statements of four prosecution witnesses, namely Vijay singh PW 20, Dr S. P. Elhance PW 18; Vijay bahadur PW 17: and Shambhukaran, ASI PW t9 were recorded in presence of these three accused persons after their arrest, and after their putting appearance in the court, The learned Additional Sessions Judge, after recording the statements of the above prosecution witnesses, heard the arguments. As the three accused persons were before the learned Additional Sessions Judge, the previous sessions case was renumbered as Sessions Case No. 17/1981. The learned Additional Sessions Judge after hearing both the sides, gave his judgement dated 19th Jan., 1982, by which he convicted accused Ikram and Abdul Kalam under Sections 148 & 302/149, IPC. He, however, acquitted accused Abdul Aziz of the charges levelled against him, as no case was made out and established against him. Thus accused-appellants Jalal,. Bheru and Mohan preferred appeals against the judgement of the Additional Sessions Judge, Kota, dated 29th Feb., 1980. while accused-appellants Ikram and Abdul Kalam preferred appeal against the judgement of the Additional Sessions Judge dated 19th Jan., 1982. I here are two judgements with regard to one and the same incident. The entire prosecution evidence in Sessions Case No. 52/1978 was recorded in presence of the appellants. The statements of lour prosecution witnesses as mentioned above, were not recorded in presence of Abdul Aziz accused, and hence, these four witnesses were re-examined when Abdul Aziz was brought before the court. All these four witnesses were re-examined in presence of Abdul Aziz, Ikram and Abdul Kalam. The case was then fixed for final arguments. On that date, Abdul Kalam and Ikram accused remained absent from the court and their case was separated under Sec. 317 (2), Crimial P.C. Has the entire evidence was recorded in presence of all the accused-appellants, in Sessions Case No. 52/1978, Accused Ikram and Abdul Kalam were asked to explain the offences against them, under Sec. 313, Cr. P.C.
(3.)Hence, I deem it proper to dispose of all the three appeals by this common judgment.