Mr. Mon had employed Ramu as a domestic help for quite sometime. Ramu had intention of robbing the house, so he planned the robbery on a day when most of the family members were out. Ramu was caught off guard, when Ms. M

Section 220 (1) of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 provides for single trial for more than one offence. If, in one series of acts so connected together as to form the same transaction, more offences than one are committed by the same person, he may be charged with, and tried at one trial, for every offence. The above section could be used when different offences committed by a single person or same persons and the trial could be a combined and held as a single trial. The Calcutta High Court in Madan Gaped Dey and Anor. v. Slate and Anor. held that if several offences are committed in the course of the same transaction, section 235 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1898 would authorize their joinder for the purpose of a single trial. If a continuous thread runs through the acts complained of, charges arising out of those acts would be liable to be joined together under this section. Continuity of action, therefore, seems to be a very important test in the matter. Yes, the offences committed by Ramu can be clubbed in single trial.