Back
2024 Supreme(Online)(MP) 3844
HIGH COURT OF MADHYA PRADESH
MANINDER S. BHATTI, J
Amandeep Singh Saran – Appellant
Versus
The State Of Madhya Pradesh – Respondent
WP 3363/2024
Varinder Kumar Sharma,Advocate General
The court established that clubbing multiple FIRs is justified to ensure speedy trial and effective defense when allegations are similar.
Headnote:(A) Constitution of India - Article 226 - Petition for clubbing of multiple FIRs - Petitioner sought clubbing of FIRs filed against him in different jurisdictions, alleging non-repayment of deposits by his company - Court noted that allegations were similar and clubbing would ensure speedy trial and effective defense - Apex Court precedent supported clubbing of FIRs to avoid multiplicity of proceedings. (Paras 1, 4, 9, 10, 11)
(B) Speedy Trial - The principle of speedy trial is paramount, and clubbing of FIRs is justified to ensure a singular judicial process for similar allegations. (Paras 10, 11)
Facts of the case:
The petitioner, associated with HBN Dairies & Allied Pvt. Ltd., faced multiple FIRs across various states for failing to return deposits promised to investors. The company was in the process of closing down and cooperating with regulatory authorities. (Paras 2, 4)
Findings of Court:
The court directed the clubbing of FIRs to ensure a unified trial process, emphasizing the need for speedy justice and effective defense for the accused. (Paras 11, 12)
Issues: The main issue was whether the FIRs could be clubbed for a single trial given the similar nature of allegations. (Paras 8, 11)
Ratio Decidendi: The court held that clubbing of FIRs is warranted to prevent multiplicity of proceedings and to uphold the principle of speedy trial, as established by the Apex Court. (Paras 9, 10)
Result: Petition disposed of with directions for clubbing FIRs.
| Table of Content |
|---|
| 1. counsel's contention on firs (Para 3 , 4 , 5 , 6 , 7) |
| 2. allegations in firs (Para 8) |
| 3. clubbing justified for speedy trial (Para 9 , 10 , 11) |
| 4. direction for clubbing firs (Para 12 , 13 , 14 , 15) |
ORDER
This petition has been filed by the petitioner under Article 226 of the Constitution of India while praying for following reliefs:-
(i) Issue a Writ, order or direction directing Clubbing and/or Transfer of all FIR's bearing No.660 of 2016 P.S. Harda District Harda dated 04.08.2016, FIR bearing No.103 of 2016 P.S. Pali District Umaria and FIR bearing No. 532 of 2013 P.S. City Kotwali District Mandsaur filed against the petitioner at various place in the State of Madhya Pradesh before any Appropriate Agency/Court at one place as deemed fit by this Hon'ble Court.
(ii) Pass such other and further orders as may be deemed fit and proper in the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The facts as detailed in the petition reveal that various FIRs have been filed against the petitioner and company namely, HBN Dairies & Allied Pvt. Ltd. all over the country alleging that many people including the complainants in the said FIRs, had deposited money with the said company and the company had promised to return the double of the deposited amount within a specified time on maturity. Thereafter, on maturity, when the said amount was not repaid to the people including the complainants, the aforesaid FIRs were registered as a result of which, the present petitioner was arrested. The trial commenced in all the FIRs but at a slow pace and the company has repaid the amount to many of the complainants including other persons/depositors. Certain FIRs in question were lodged at a time when company was in the process of closing down all activities pursuant to directions by SEBI and was cooperating with the SEBI and the SAT towards redressing the issue of repayment to its depositors and thus, there was no mens-rea of cheating or defrauding the depositors.
3. It is contended by the counsel that against the petitioner, the First Information Reports in respect of the above, have been lodged at various Police Stations in various State. So far as, the State of Madhya Pradesh is concerned, the following First Information Reports have been lodged:-
| S.No. | FIR NO. | P.S. | DISTRICT | SECTION |
| 1 | 532/2013 | CITY KOTWALI | MANDSAUR | 420 & 406 OF IPC AND SECTION 3/4 OF M.P. NIKSHEPKON KE HITON KA SANRAKSHAN ADHINIYAM |
| 2 | 660/2016 | HARDA | HARDA | 420 & 34 OF IPC |
| 420, 409, 120-B AND 506 OF IPC AND SECTION 3/4 |
| 3 | 103/2016 | PALI | UMARIA | OF M.P. NIKSHEPKON KE HITON KA SANRAKSHAN ADHINIYAM |
4. It is contended by the counsel that the aforesaid cases pertain to the same chain of transaction and the trial of the cases at different places will contravene the concept of speedy trial. The present petitioner would not be in a position to defend himself properly as the trials are going on at different places. It is further contended by the counsel that the petitioner had approached the Apex Court as well. The Apex Court vide order dated 06.11.2023 in W.P. (Criminal) No.341/2022 contained in Annexure P/10, extended liberty to the present petitioner to approach the respective High Courts for the purposes of clubbing of the FIRs which have been lodged at different places in territorial jurisdiction of such High Courts. It is contended by the counsel that the issue pertaining to clubbing of First Information Reports is no more res-integra and the same has been conclusively decided by the Apex Court in the case of Radhey Shyam vs. State of Haryana and Ors. [W.P. (Cr.) No.75/2020] . It is further contended by the counsel that the aforesaid decision has also been taken into consideration by this Court in W.P.No.23621/2023 ( Devendra Kumar Shrivastava and others vs. The State of M.P. and Others ) decided on 21.09.2023. Therefore, it is contended by the counsel that in view of the law laid down by the Apex Court as well as this Court, all the First Information reports as detailed above, be clubbed and be directed to
