RAMNATH LATHI Vs. STATE OF MADHYA PRADESH

JUDGEMENT

(1.) SHRI Ramnath Lathi, the petitioner in person. Shri S. H. Sen, Dy. G. A. for State. Both of them have been heard. Record has been perused. The petitioner is hereby assailing the order passed by learned Second Additional Sessions Judge, Ujjain in the matter of S. T. 23/93 dated 7-8-1996 by which Shri R. N. Lathi, advocate, the petitioner was prohibited from appearing in the case for co-accused for defending him.

(2.) FEW facts need to be stated for the purpose of unfolding the controversy. A criminal case was pending against accused Umrao and 10 others for offence punishable under section 148 read with 149 and section 307 of Indian Penal Code. Those accused were charged that on 10-11-1993 they had formed an unlawful assembly along with present petitioner-R. N. Lathi with a common object to assault Satyanarayan. It was also alleged that the members of said unlawful assembly were armed with deadly weapons for the purpose of assaulting Satyanarayan. By using those weapons they did cause such bodily injuries to Satyanarayan which if Satyanarayan would have died would have made all of them liable for conviction for his murder. The record shows that on 20-11-1993, the present petitioner R. N. Lathi was made an accused by the court in view of provisions of section 319, Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 (hereinafter referred to as Code for short ). The charge was framed against other accused and the petitioner by the Court on 20-11-1993.

(3.) THE petitioner, R. N. Lathi wanted to appear for accused Umrao Singh, when he was defending himself in that case. Said accused Umrao s/o Gangaram had submitted an application for engaging Shri R. N. Lathi, advocate for his defence in that case in view of provisions of section 303 of the Code. Learned court has opined the as Ramnath Lathi was an accused in that case he was not entitled to appear as counsel for his co-accused and he (learned Judge), thus, did not permit the petitioner, Ramnath Lathi to appear on behalf of co-accused Umrao and that order is being assailed by Ramnath Lathi, by this petition.