THE HON'BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE UJJAL BHUYAN
AND
THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE N.TUKARAMJI
Writ Appeal Nos.80, 82, 83, 84, 86, 88, 91, 92, 94, 95,
96, 97, 98, 100, 102, 104, 105, 106, 108, 109, 110,
111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117, 118, 119, 120, 122,
123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129, 135, 137 & 142 of
2023
COMMON JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon'ble the Chief Justice Ujjal Bhuyan)
Heard Mr.P.Roy Reddy, learned counsel for the
appellants; Mr.Sunkara Naresh, learned counsel for the
first respondent; and Mr.Roopender, learned Government
Pleader for Home Department representing respondent Nos.2 to 7.
2. These appeals are directed against the common order dated 29.12.2022 passed by the learned Single Judge allowing Writ Petition Nos.45620 of 2022 and batch filed by respondents No.1 as the writ petitioners.
3. In all the writ appeals, grievance expressed by the appellants is that without issuing notice to the appellants and without hearing them, learned Single Judge directed the concerned Police Station to register the complaints 2 lodged by the writ petitioners in connection with M/s.Sahithi Infratech Ventures India Pvt. Ltd., and thereafter to transfer the F.I.Rs. to Central Crime Station, Detective Department, Hyderabad for investigation in all the crimes. Further, Investigation Officer, Central Crime Station has been directed to expedite and complete the investigation as early as possible preferably within a period of three (3) months from the date of receipt of a copy of the said order.
4. Appellants before us are the wife and son of B.Lakshmi Narayana, Director of M/s.Sahithi Infratech Ventures India Private Limited, which is engaged in the business of development of flats. Raising various grounds against the developer, the related writ petitions came to be filed by persons who had booked flats in the development project seeking registration of F.I.R. against the developer.
5. Though this Court had expressed a view that an intra Court appeal under Clause 15 of Letters Patent would not be maintainable against such a direction of learned Single Judge in view of the decision of the Supreme Court 3 in Ram Kishan Fauji v. State of Haryana1, nonetheless, this Court on 27.01.2023 had called upon the learned Government Pleader for Home to apprise the Court about the progress made, following the directions given by the learned Single Judge. In the hearing today, Mr.M.Roopender, learned Government Pleader, submits that though F.I.Rs., were lodged in different Police Stations following the directions of the learned Single Judge, those have now been sent to the Central Crime Station, Detective Department, Hyderabad. Investigation has been started by the Central Crime Station in Cr.No.158 of 2022.
6. It is trite law that there cannot be multiple F.I.Rs. in respect of a single offence. The law is well settled that even if multiple F.I.Rs. are filed, the subsequent F.I.Rs. should be treated as statement made under Section 162 of Criminal Procedure Code, 1973 and transmitted to the Police Station where the lead case is being investigated. We have been informed that in this case the lead case is Cr.No.158 of 2022.
1 (2017) 5 SCC 533 4
7. In view of the above clarification, we are of the view that we need not enter into the merit and maintainability of the writ appeals. Needless to say, the Investigating Agency shall scrupulously follow the laid down procedure and ensure that there is fair investigation.
8. At this stage, learned counsel for the appellants submits that the applications under Section 482 of Cr.P.C have been filed before this Court for quashing of the F.I.Rs.
9. We express no opinion in this regard.
10. Writ appeals are accordingly disposed of. Miscellaneous applications pending, if any, shall stand closed. However, there shall be no order as to costs.
______________________________________ UJJAL BHUYAN, CJ ______________________________________ N.TUKARAMJI, J 10.02.2023 MRM