JUDGMENT : We have partly heard the learned counsel appearing on either side in CRL.A.(MD) Nos.348 & 349 of 2017 and 15 & 178 of 2019. We are prima facie convinced that the Trial Court ought to have conducted a joint trial since both the cases relates to the murder that was committed in the course of the same transaction and in both the cases, the same accused persons are involved. The case squarely falls under Sections 219 and 220 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where the Court below ought to have framed charges in a single case and conducted the trial. It is not known as to why there were two separate cases and two seperate trials conducted. Neither the prosecution nor the Court below has applied its mind to the rudimentary principles of the Code of Criminal Procedure, where all the accused persons could have been charged together for both the incidents, since it has occurred in the course of the same transaction. 2. Unfortunately, for one set of occurrence, the accused persons have been convicted and for other set of occurrence they have been acquitted. The Investigating Officer, who was examined as P.W.20 in S.C.No.301 of 2014 and P.W.31 in S.C.No.300 of 2014, has confined his stand to the respective case and thereby has virtually weakened the case of the prosecution. He is not even present before this Court when these Appeals were taken up for hearing. 3. The learned Additional Public Prosecutor expressed his helplessness by stating that in none of the cases, the Investigating Officers are present before this Court, when the Criminal Appeal is heard. This is in spite of the fact that a request is made to the Investigating Officer to be present before this court. 4. The learned counsel appearing on either side are directed to make their submissions with regard to:- (a) Scope of Sections 219 and 220 of the Code of Criminal procedure; (b) Scope of exercising the power of remand by the Appellate Court; (c) Question of prejudice that may be caused to the accused persons. 5. It is made clear that in every Criminal Appeal that is heard before this Court, as well as the Principal Bench, the concerned Investigating Officers must positively be present before the Court, failing which, this Court will be constrained to issue warrant and ensure their presence. 5. It is made clear that in every Criminal Appeal that is heard before this Court, as well as the Principal Bench, the concerned Investigating Officers must positively be present before the Court, failing which, this Court will be constrained to issue warrant and ensure their presence. This was a practice which was followed for a long time and it has now been given a go-by. The Superior Officials to whom this note is marked, shall ensure compliance. 6. Post these cases on 01.10.2019, for further hearing.