JUDGMENT Stuart, J.
1. In this case the prosecution put forward that a burglary was committed in the house of a certain Karari, in which a considerable quantity of cloth was stolen. It is alleged that later on a portion of this 10th was found in the possession of Ram Sarup. On a later date, another portion of the cloth was found in possession of Pir Bux. Ram Sarup and Pir Bux have been tried together and convicted each under Section 411, Indian Penal Code, of being in dis. honest possession of stolen property knowing the same to be stolen. I am not concerned with the truth or falsehood of the prosecution story with regard to the commission of the burglary, the possession of the cloth by the two applicants and its identification as a portion of the stolen property. It is not necessary for me to express an opinion as to the value of the evidence on these points. There is a defeat in the procedure in the trying the two men together. This is an insuperable defeat. They could not be tried together legally for the offences which they are alleged to have committed. The conviction cannot stand. I direct that the applicant Ram Sarup be released. As, however, the conviction is equally bad against Pir Bux who has not applied, I further direct that the conviction of Pir Bux be set aside and that he be also released. The office will see the latter order carried out.