One of my clients is a co- accused with three other accused in the offence u/s 392, 411 of IPC. The roles of all the accused, including knowledge of the crime given effect is largely varied. This brought me to the occasion of evaluating as to whether and how will the trial transpire if it goes along with the other accused (involving the prime accused). To avoid misjoinder of charges during the trial, I will move an application u/s 218 of CrPC. The broad objective is to avail my client a notice of precise accusation and to save him from being embarrassed in his defence by the confusion which is likely to result from lumping together in a single charge distinct offences and from combining several charges at one trial.
On this very notion of law, there’s a conception well explained in the following authority.
Case : Nasib Singh v. State of Punjab and Another (2022) 2 Supreme Court Cases 89
Bench : Justice Dr. D.Y.Chandrachud,. Justice Vikram Nath, Justice B.V. Nagarathna
Holding a separate trial is the rule and a joint trial is the exception. Section 218 provides that separate trials shall be conducted for distinct offences alleged to be committed by a person. Sections 219-221 provide exceptions to this general rule. If a person falls under these exceptions, then a joint trial for the offences which a person is charged with may be conducted. Similarly, under Section 223, a joint trial may be held for persons charged with different offences if any of the clauses in the provision are separately or on a combination satisfied.
Importantly, while applying the principles enunciated in Sections 218-223 on conducting joint and separate trials, the trial court should apply a two-pronged test, namely,
(i) whether conducting a joint/separate trial will prejudice the defence of the accused; and/or
(ii) whether conducting a joint/separate trial would cause judicial delay.
The possibility of conducting a joint trial will have to be determined at the beginning of the trial and not after the trial based on the result of the trial. The appellate court may determine the validity of the argument that there ought to have been a separate/joint trial only based on whether the trial had prejudiced the right of accused or the prosecutrix.
A conviction or acquittal of the accused cannot be set aside on the mere ground that there was a possibility of a joint or a separate trial. To set aside the order of conviction or acquittal, it must be proved that the rights of the parties were prejudiced because of the joint or separate trial, as the case may be.
© 2025 Powered by Digi Grow Solutions | Design by Hasan Jafer
