Mudholkar, J. - (1.) This judgment will also govern Crl. As. No. 166 of 1962, 167 of 1962 and 168 of 1962. A common question arises in these appeals from a judgment of the Patna High Court dismissing four revision applications preferred before it by four revision applications preferred before it by four sets of appellants in the appeals before us. Counsel on both the sides agree that since the relevant facts of all the proceedings are similar and the question of law arising from them is the same it will be sufficient to refer to the facts of Case No. TR 320/60.
(2.) Four informations were lodged at the police station Ghora Saha on April 14, 1960 by different persons against the different appellants in these cases and a similar information was lodged against some of the appellants by one Mali Ram. In all these cases the allegations made by the informants were that each set of the accused persons armed with deadly weapons went to the shops of the various informants, demanded from them large sums of money and threatened them with death if they failed to pay the amounts demanded by them. The informations also stated that some of these persons paid part of the money and were given time to pay the balance while some agreed to pay the amounts demanded. Upon informations given by these persons offences under S. 392, Indian Penal Code, were registered by the station officer and after investigation five challans were lodged by him in the Court of Magistrate, First Class at Motihari. One of the cases ended in an acquittal but we have not been informed of the date of the judgment in that case. In the other four cases trial had come to a close in that all the prosecution witnesses and the defence witnesses had been examined and the cases had been closed for judgment.
(3.) In the case against the appellants in Crl. A. No. 165 of 1962 the challan was presented on October 27, 1960. The order sheet of that date reads as follows: S. No. "Date of order or proceedingOrder with the signature of the CourtOffice action taken with date 1. 27-10-1960All the 4 accused are present. Heard both sides. It is argued on behalf of the prosecution that it is fit case for adopting procedure under Chapter XVIII, Cr. P. C. and also that the entire occurrence relates to offences committed on 4 dates so that all of them cannot be dealt with in a single case. Discussed law point. Charge u/s 302, I. P. C. framed against accused Thakur Ram and Jagarnath Pd. And explained to them. They plead not guilty This case will constitute an independent case. As for the other parts of the alleged occurrence accused Jagarnath, Kamal Ram and Bansi Ram are charged separately u/s. 384 I. P. C. and further accused Thakur Ram u/s 384/109. I. P. C. and explained to the respective accused. They plead not guilty. These charges relating to three incidents on 3 dates will constitute a separate single case. Start separate order sheet for both. Summons P. W. for 26-10-60 and 27-11-60. Accused as before. (Sd.)/- O. NATH". ;