D.P. Singh, J.

1. Heard both the sides at length.

2. According to learned Counsel, the prosecution of this petitioner along with others in connection with Kunda P.S. Case No. 29 of 2003 requires to be quashed. In this context it is submitted that for an occurrence dated 23.2.2003 an information was lodged with the police by one Prabhanjan Prasad Singh which was registered as Kunda P.S. Case No. 28 of 2003 and investigation started. However for the same occurrei ice another information was recorded by the same police on fard beyan of one Ram Naresh Singh Assistant Inspector of Police and Anr. case was registered as Kunda P.S. Case No. 29 of 2003. According to the learned Counsel for the petitioner, since both the cases were registered for the same occurrence alleging therein similar facts against the petitioner and others, the police should have investigated the case amalgamating these two fard beyan and filed a joint comprehensive final form. However, police has investigated the two cases separately and filed two separate charge sheets has resulting in trial of the petitioner and others in two different cases which requires to be quashed.

3. The learned Counsel appearing o