SUPREME COURT OF INDIA
B.R. GAVAI, ARAVIND KUMAR, JJ.
Amanat Ali – Appellant
Versus
State of Karnataka and others – Respondents
Writ Petition (Criminal) No.432 of 2022
Decided on : 11-12-2023
Constitution of India – Article 142 – Consolidation of FIRs – FIRs registered against Petitioner in different states at various police stations, under various sections of IPC and M.P. Act – Multiplicity of proceedings will not be in larger public interest and State – It is appropriate to exercise power conferred under Article 142 of Constitution of India to accede to relief claimed to the extent of consolidation of FIRs registered in State of Madhya Pradesh for being tried together as one trial as far as possible – All cases pending in State of Madhya Pradesh shall be transferred to District of Devas, Madhya Pradesh where FIR has been filed and registered against petitioner – Jurisdictional courts shall take immediate steps to transfer proceedings for being consolidated and adjudicated by one trial to be decided on its own merits – Prayer for transfer of cases pending in States of Karnataka and Jharkhand to State of Madhya Pradesh rejected. (Para 6)
Facts of the case:
Counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that petitioner being aged 60 years has been foisted with several cases in States of Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Jharkhand for similar offences and he was never appointed as the Director of the company – G. Life India Developers and Colonizers Limited. Contending that the prosecution initiated is in relation to the fraud/scam committed by the company and petitioner is in way concerned with same. It is also contended, for the purposes of speedy and fair trial and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings it would be in the best interest of all that cases pending in various States be consolidated and posted to the court of a competent jurisdiction at Guna, Madhya Pradesh.
Findings of Court:
Standing Counsel appearing for State of Madhya Pradesh has expressed no objection if these cases are consolidated and listed before one court having jurisdiction.
Result : Writ Petition disposed of with directions.
JUDGMENT :
Aravind Kumar, J.
1. By way of this writ petition, the petitioner has sought for the following relief:
“Consolidate/Club all the FIRs (i) FIR No. 324/2017, 406/420/120 (B) IPC and 4/6(1)/6(2) M.P. Act, Dewas, M.P., (ii) FIR No. 479/2018, 420/34 IPC, Indore, M.P., (iii) FIR No. 283/2020, 420/34 IPC, Khargone M.P., (iv) FIR No. 002/2021, 420 IPC, Gokul Road, Hubali, Karnataka, (v) FIR No. 090/2021, 406/420/120(B) IPC, Dhadhara, Gumla, Jharkhand registered against the Petitioner in different states at various police stations to the Court of the competent jurisdiction at Guna, Madhya Pradesh where proceedings are pending in the FIR No. 0266/2018, U/S420/407/418/406/409120B/467/468. Section 4/6(1)/6(2) MP investors Interests Act 2000, P.S. Guna Kotwali, District: Guna in the interest of justice.”
2. We have heard Mr. Chandra Prakash, learned counsel appearing for the petitioner and Mr. Yashraj Singh Bundela, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.2 and Ms. Pragya Baghel, learned counsel appearing for Respondent No.3.
3. Learned counsel appearing for the petitioner has contended that petitioner being aged 60 years has been foisted with several cases in the States of Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Jharkhand for similar offences and he was never appointed as the Director of the company – G. Life India Developers and Colonizers Limited. Contending that the prosecution initiated is in relation to the fraud/scam committed by the company and petitioner is in way concerned with same. It is also contended, for the purposes of speedy and fair trial and to avoid multiplicity of proceedings it would be in the best interest of all that cases pending in various States be consolidated and posted to the court of a competent jurisdiction at Guna, Madhya Pradesh. Hence, relying upon the following judgments he prays that this petition be allowed:
“1. SATINDER SINGH BHASIN V/S THE STATE OF UTTAR PRADESH & ANR.” Writ Petition (criminal) No. 197 of 2021
2. Amish Devgan vs. Union of India & Ors” WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO. 160 OF 2020
3. ABHISHEK SINGH CHAUHAN V/S UNION OF INDIA & ORS.” in WRIT PETITION (CRIMINAL) NO.40 of 2022”
4. Per contra, learned counsel appearing for the respondent Nos.2 and 3 would contend that complainant(s)/witnesses are different in each of the cases and they cannot be penalized for having lodged the prosecution by making them to travel all the way either from Karnataka or from Jharkhand to the State of Madhya Pradesh and each case having been registered by the jurisdictional police on the basis of individual cause of action it would not be apt and appropriate to transfer all the cases to one court as sought for by the petitioner and hence, they have prayed for rejection of the petition.
5. Having heard learned counsel for the parties and on perusal of the pleadings we notice that following cases are pending against the petitioner in the States of Madhya Pradesh, Karnataka and Jharkhand:
| Sl. No. | FIR No. | Under Section | Police Station | District/Station | Status of Bail | Status of Trial | Chargesheet filed or not |
| 1 | 324/2017 | 406/420/120B IPC and 4/6(1)/6(2) M.P. Act | Bank Note Press | Dewas, M.P. | On Bail | Filed | |
| 2 | 266/2020 | 406/409/416/417/420/467/468/120B IPC and 4/6(1),6(2) M.P. Act | Guna M.P. | Guna M.P. | Not on Bail | Charges framed | Filed |
| 3 | 479/2018 | 420/34 IPC | MIG Colony | Indore, M.P. | Not on Bail | Filed | |
| 4 | 283/2020 | 420/34 IPC | Un | Khargone M.P. | Not on Bail | Not produced | Not Filed |
| 5 | 002/2021 | 420 IPC | Gokul Road | Hubali, Karnataka | Not on Bail | Not produced | Not Filed |
| 6 | 090/2021 | 406/420/120B IPC | Dhadhara | Gumla Jharkhand | Not on Bail | Trial not started | Not Filed |
6. The cases noted at Serial Nos.5 and 6 have been registered by the Gokul Road, Hubli, Karnataka Police and Dhadhara, Ghumla, Jharkhand, Police Statio
Amish Devgan vs. Union of India & Ors” Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 160 of 2020 [Para 3] – Relied
Amish Devgan v. Union of India and others (2021) 1 SCC 1 [Para 6] – Relied
SupremeToday
Power conferred under Article 142 of Constitution of India can be exercised by Supreme Court for consolidation of FIRs.
The court emphasized that multiplicity of proceedings would not be in the larger public interest and directed the clubbing of FIRs state-wise for one trial, allowing subsequent FIRs to be treated as ....
The Court ruled for the consolidation of multiple FIR trials involving similar allegations to uphold the right to a fair and speedy trial.
The court ruled that multiple FIRs for the same cause of action infringe the accused's right to a speedy trial, necessitating consolidation of cases for efficient judicial proceedings.
The court emphasized the specific nature of the offenses under different State enactments and recent judgments in declining to grant the relief sought by the petitioner under Article 32 of the Consti....
Login now and unlock free premium legal research
Login to SupremeToday AI and access free legal analysis, AI highlights, and smart tools.
Login
now!
India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!
Copyright © 2023 Vikas Info Solution Pvt Ltd. All Rights Reserved.