HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT

JODHPUR

S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 1383 / 2014

Satpal S/o Sh. Mukand Lal, aged about 63 years, by caste

Agarwal, resident of Sector No.12, Suratgarh Road, Hanumangarh

Junction, District Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

----Petitioner

Versus

1. State of Rajasthan.

2. Hetram S/o Sh. Lekhram, by caste Dharnia, resident of Ward

No.22, Hanumangarh Junction, Hanumangarh, Rajasthan.

----Respondents

_____________________________________________________

For Petitioner(s) : Mr. Vineet Jain.

For Respondent(s) : Mr. MS Panwar PP for the State.

_____________________________________________________

HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE PUSHPENDRA SINGH BHATI

Order

25/08/2017

1.

The petitioner has preferred this misc. petition under

Section 482 of Cr.P.C. for consolidating the investigation of FIRs

Nos.85/2012 dated 16.04.2012, 86/2012 dated 16.04.2012 and

87/2012 dated 16.04.2012 with FIR No.84/2012 dated

16.04.2012, registered at Police Station CPS, Jaipur, outpost

Hanumangarh, for the offences under Sections 13(1)(d) & 13 (2)

of the Prevention of Corruption Act and under Sections 420, 467,

468, 471, 477A, 201 and 120 B of IPC.

2.

Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that the

matter is squarely covered by the judgment rendered by this

Court in Bhanwar Lal Vs. State of Rajasthan (Criminal Writs

No. 35/2017) decided on 18.08.2017.

(2 of 7)

[CRLMP-1383/2014]

3.

This Court on 18.08.2017 has passed the following

order in Bhanwar Lal Vs. State (Supra):

“1.

The petitioner has preferred this criminal

writ petition under Article 226 of the Constitution

of India aggrieved by the order dated 12.05.2017

passed by Additional Superintendent of Police,

Anti Corruption Bureau, Jaipur whereby he has

refused to consolidate FIR No.84/2012, 85/2012,

86/2012 alongwith FIR No.87/2012 lodged at Anti

Corruption Bureau, Jaipur Chowki, A.C.B.

Hanumangarh for the offences under Sections

13(1)(d), 13 (2) P.C. Act, 1988 read with

Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 477A, 201 & 120-B

of IPC.

2. Learned counsel for the petitioner states that

the present case is squarely covered by the

decision rendered by a coordinate Bench of this

Court in

S.B. Criminal Misc. Petition

No.1630/2013; Sanjay Harsh & Anr. Vs.

State of Rajasthan & Anr. (alongwith two

connected matters) decided on 04.07.2016.

3. The coordinate Bench of this Court on

04.07.2016 has passed the following order in

Sanjay Harsh (supra):-

“These three miscellaneous petitions have

been preferred by the petitioners herein for

assailing the legality and validity of the FIR

No.201/2013 registered by the Anti Corruption

Bureau, Outpost Jaisalmer for the offences under

Sections 13 (1)(d) & 13(2) of the Prevention of

Corruption Act and Section 120-B IPC.

The FIR has been challenged principally on the

ground that the same is nothing but a second FIR

(3 of 7)

[CRLMP-1383/2014]

on the same facts. The FIR under challenge was

lodged by the respondent No.2 Bahadur Khan son

of Aamad Khan, resident of Gafoor Bhatta,

Jaisalmer. In order to seek quashing of the FIR,

the petitioners have placed on record, copy of

another FIR No.351/2011 registered at the Police

Station Jaisalmer for the offences under Sections

420, 467, 468, 471, 120B, 34, 217 and 218 IPC

at the instance of the respondent No.2 Bahadur

Khan himself.

Sarva Shri Manish Shishodia, Vikas Balia and

Mahesh Thanvi, learned counsel representing the

respective accused petitioners, relied upon the

following judgments in support of their

contentions and urged that as the allegations

levelled in the impugned FIR and those levelled in

the FIR No.351/2011 are exactly identical, it

virtually amounts to registration of a second FIR

on the sa