Can the court prioritize a counter case when main case trial is ongoing?

A case and counter-case (or cross-case) are generally tried together by the same court to avoid conflicting judgments and ensure a fair trial. The same judge should hear one case after the other, but separate judgments are pronounced for each case. 

Therefore you cannot expect the counter case to be disposed before the original case, both will be disposed simultaneously

Thank you for the reply. However, the original case dates back to 2013, and unfortunately, the trial is still pending. The counter-case was initially filed in the Magistrate Court, but during the commencement of the trial, it was identified as a counter-case and accordingly transferred to the Sessions Court. Despite this, the trial remains incomplete.

In such circumstances, doesn't this prolonged delay amount to an injustice to the individuals involved? Also, I would like to know—are the procedures you mentioned (about both cases being tried together by the same judge and disposed of simultaneously) governed by any strict legal rule, or are they merely procedural directives or guidelines?

While not explicitly mandated by law, it is generally recommended that the original criminal case and the counter case (also known as a cross-case) be tried together, ideally by the same court. This approach aims to avoid conflicting judgments and ensure a more complete picture of the incident. 

There's no specific provision in the Criminal Procedure Code (CrPC) that mandates joint trials in all cases.

The Supreme Court has emphasized the need for the same judge to hear both cases, one after the other, to avoid conflicting findings and ensure a comprehensive understanding of the facts. 

The judge typically hears the evidence and arguments in the first case, reserves judgment, then proceeds to hear the counter-case, and ultimately pronounces separate judgments on both cases.

In sum, the procedure prescribed by the apex court and various High Courts in this regard is that both the cases must be tried separately and independently by the same judge and decided on the basis of evidence led in that case only without being influenced by the materials and evidence led in the other case.

Ok.Thank you