Rajasthan High Court - Jodhpur
Jagdish Rai vs Firm Bajaj Taxtiles ... on 1 December, 2023
Author: Nupur Bhati
Bench: Nupur Bhati
[2023:RJ-JD:41342]
HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT
JODHPUR
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6447/2021
Jagdish Rai S/o Thakar Das Arora, Aged About 83 Years, H.no.
R.r.-3, Ridhi Sidhi First, Sri Ganganagar.
----Petitioner
Versus
Laxmi Devi W/o Kishan Chand Bajaj Arora, 2-B-24, Sukhadia
Nagar, Sriganganagar.
----Respondent
Connected With
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6445/2021
Jagdish Rai S/o Thakar Das Arora, Aged About 83 Years, H.no.
R.r.-3, Ridhi Sidhi First, Sri Ganganagar.
----Petitioner
Versus
Firm Bajaj Taxtiles, 37-A, Public Park, Sri Ganganagar Through
Proprietor Kishan Chand Bajaj S/o Shyama Ram Arora, R/o 2-B-
24, Sukhadianagar, Sriganganagar.
----Respondent
S.B. Criminal Misc(Pet.) No. 6450/2021
Jagdish Rai S/o Thakar Das Arora, Aged About 83 Years, H.no.
R.r.-3, Ridhi Sidhi First, Sri Ganganagar.
----Petitioner
Versus
Firm Kishan Chand Bajaj Huf, Through Karta Kishan Chand Bajaj
S/o Shyama Ram Arora, R/o 2-B-24, Sukhadianagar,
Sriganganagar.
----Respondent
For Petitioner(s) : Mr. J.K. Suthar
For Respondent(s) : Mr. D.S. Thind
HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE NUPUR BHATI
Order 01/12/2023
1. Since, these misc. petitions involve common cause of action, thus, they are decided by a common order.
2. The petitioner has preferred these criminal misc. petitions with a prayer that the petitioner wants trial for all the offences committed in pursuant to the application filed under Section 219 (Downloaded on 01/12/2023 at 08:52:21 PM) [2023:RJ-JD:41342] (2 of 3) [CRLMP-6447/2021] of Cr.P.C. for the offence under Section 138 of the Negotiable Instruments Act for bouncing of three cheques.
3. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that all the three FIRs that have been lodged against the petitioner in respect to three cheques issued by the petitioner for the year 2016 and thus, all the three cases related to the offence of same kind and have been committed within 12 months. Learned counsel for the petitioner submits that in light of Section 219 of Cr.P.C., the complaints ought to have been directed to be consolidated and in support of his contention, learned counsel for the petitioner placed reliance upon the judgment dated 17.11.2012 passed in SBCRLMP No.1835/2011 titled as Chand Ratan Vs. Roop Chand.
4. Per contra, learned counsel for the respondent, opposed the prayer made by the learned counsel for the petitioner, however, he submits that the impugned orders have been rightly passed in favour of the petitioner.
5. Heard learned counsel representing the parties.
6. Upon perusal of the record placed in all the three petitions, it is writ large that the petitioner is being prosecuted for dishonoring of three cheques issued by him in the year 2016. Thus, all the three complaints which have been filed, arise out of dishonor of the cheques issued to the respondents for the same year. The complaint in all these cases, is same and in each of the complaint filed by the complainant, reference is made to all three cheques.
7. Resultantly, these misc. petitions are allowed and it is directed that the trial of these three complaints being complaint Nos.3835/2018, 421/2019 and 3834/2018, pending in the Court (Downloaded on 01/12/2023 at 08:52:21 PM) [2023:RJ-JD:41342] (3 of 3) [CRLMP-6447/2021] of learned Special Judicial Magistrate No.2 (NI Act Cases), Sri Ganganagar, shall be clubbed together and tried together. The impugned order dated 28.09.2021 passed by learned Additional Sessions Judge No.1, Sri Ganganagar, is hereby quashed and set aside.
8. Stay petitions are also stand disposed of.
(DR. NUPUR BHATI),J 425-Devesh/Surabhi/-
(Downloaded on 01/12/2023 at 08:52:21 PM) Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)