JUDGMENT

G.Narendar, J. - Heard Sri.Aruna Shyam.M, learned counsel for the petitioner, Smt.K.P.Yashodha, learned High Court Government Pleader for respondent No.1 State and Sri.H.S.Vivekananda, learned counsel for respondent No.3 in W.P.No.2961/2019 and respondent No.2 in Crl.P.No.2822/2016.

2. The facts in brief are that one Smt.Vishalakshi Bhat, who is arrayed as accused No.1 in C.C.No.7358/2016 pending on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate, Bengaluru, was employed as the Branch Manger of HDFC Life Insurance, BTM Layout Branch, Bengaluru. That, between the years 2013 to 2015, the said accused is alleged to have induced several persons to invest in certain schemes allegedly launched and run by the HDFC Company. That one such Scheme was called 'Employee Benefit Scheme' and it is alleged that she represented to several people that if money is invested in her name with the Bank as per the Scheme, higher rates of interest will be paid by the Bank for deposits by the employees and stating so, she is said to have convinced numerous complainants to transfer money to her account or to hand-over money to her by promising them that she would invest it in the deposit schemes and on maturity, she would return it along with accrued interest. Further, that she would represent to the employers that the said person, who has invested, is a blood relative and thereby enabling the said person to attractive rates of interest on the said investments. One such complainant is the defacto complainant Respondent No.3/2 in the petitions.

3. It is relevant to note that several complaints having been filed resulting in serial prosecutions and led to the first accused approaching this Court in Crl.P.Nos.8704/2016, 8705/2016, 8706/2016, 8707/2016, 8708/2016, 8709/2016, 8710/2016, 8711/2016, 8712/2016 and 8713/2016. A Co-ordinate Bench of this Court, after examining the law laid down in this regard and the provisions of Sections 154, 155, 156, 157, 162, 169, 170 and 173 of Cr.P.C and after relying upon the law laid down by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of T.T. Antony vs. State of Kerala and others, (2001) 6 SCC 181 , was pleased to quash the FIRs and chargesheets filed in various cases and by order dated 11.01.2017 proceeded to order as follows:

'9. It is necessary that a case of fresh investigation based on the second or successive FIRs not being a counter case filed in connection with the same or connected cognizable offence alleged to have been committed in the course of same transaction and in respect of which pursuant to the first FIR either investigation is under way or vital report under Section 173(2) Cr.P.C. is forwarded to the Magistrate, it is necessary for this Court to quash the same in exercise of power under Section 482 as laid down by the Supreme Court. Accordingly, the respective FIRs and the charge sheets in the above cases stand quashed.

10. It would also be necessary for the respective Investigating Officer involved in each of the cases to approach the court below which shall return the charge sheets to the concerned Investigating Officer who in turn shall hand over the same to the Investigating Officer in the case that was instituted against the petitioner namely, C.C. No.7358/2016 on the file of the I Additional Chief Metropolitan Magistrate who shall in turn proceed in terms of the directions issued herein above and the charge sheets laid before the court. The original records pertaining to each of the cases shall also stand transferred to the aforesaid court which shall try the case as one.'

4. That pursuant to the directions of this Court, an additional charge sheet came to be filed and in the additional charge sheet, the petitioner was sent up as an accused and arrayed as accused No.6. It is in this background, the petitioner is before this Court.

5. The petitioner had, at an earlier point of time, on registration of the FIR No.0165/2016 dated 05.04.2016 approached this Court in Crl.P.No.2822/2016 prayi