iv. Cr. No. 0022/2020 dated 19.03.2020, for offences
punishable under Section 406, 420 read with 34 of the
Indian Penal Code and the Charge Sheet dated 20.07.2023
adding the offences under Section 4, 5 and 6 of Prize Chits
& Money Circulation Schemes (Banning) Act, 1978
registered and filed by the respondent Karwar Town PS,
Karwar on the file of Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & CJM Court,
Karwar, Uttar Kannada District against the Petitioners No. 1
& 5, Mahesh Kishan Motewar (A2) and Sunita Kiran Thorat
(A6) [ANNEXURE - D & ANNEXURE - D1]
v. Cr. No. 0133/2020 dated 11.09.2020, for offences
punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860, registered by the Respondent Kundapura PS,
Udupi on the file of the 1st Addl. Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) &
JMFC, Kundapura, Udupi District against the Petitioners No.
1 & 3, Mahesh Kisan Montewar (A1), Vaishali Motewarr (A3)
and Sunita Kiran Thorat (A7) [ANNEXURE - E &
ANNEXURE - E1];
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
vi. Cr. No. 0099/2020 dated 22.10.2020, for offences
punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860, registered by the Respondent Haveri Town PS,
Haveri on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & CJM
Court, Haveri against the Petitioners No. 1 to 4, Mahesh
Kisan Motewar (A1), Leena Motewar (A3), Vaishali Motewar
(A4) and Abishek Motewar (A6) [ANNEXURE -F];
vii. Cr. No. 0005/2024 dated 15.01.2024, for offences
punishable under Sections 406 and 420 of the Indian Penal
Code, 1860, registered by the Respondent Koppal Town PS,
Koppal on the file of the Prl. Civil Judge (Sr. Dn.) & CJM
Court, Koppal against the Petitioner No. 1, Mahesh Kishan
Motewar (A1) [ANNEXURE - G]; and
viii. Cr. No. 0026/2024 dated 23.03.2024, for offences
punishable under Sections 403, 406, 420 read with Section
34 of the Indian Penal Code, 1860, Section 9 of the
Karnataka Protection of Interest of Depositors in Financial
Establishments Act, 2004 and Section 21 of The Banning of
Unregulated Deposit Schemes Act, 2019 registered by the
Respondent Chitradurga CEN PS, Chitradurga on the file of
the Hon'ble Prl. District & Sessions Court, Chitradurga
against the Petitioners No. 1 to 4, Mahesh Kisan Motewar
(A1), Leena (A2), Vaishali (A3) and Abhishek (A5)
[ANNEXURE - H."
2. Heard learned Senior counsel for the petitioners and
learned HCGP for the respondents and perused the material on
record.
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
3. A perusal of the material on record will indicate that
several criminal proceedings have been initiated against the
petitioners and in some of the proceedings, FIRs have been
registered against the petitioners, while in the remaining
proceedings, charge sheets have been filed against the petitioners.
4. Learned Senior counsel for the petitioners invited my
attention to the material on record in order to point out that having
regard to the various locations across the State of Karnataka where
the aforesaid proceedings have been initiated, the petitioners are
being put into great hardship and inconvenience in defending the
proceedings, which are pending before the different places /
locations and as such, they are before this Court seeking clubbing
and consolidating of the proceedings to be tried at Bengaluru. In
support of his submissions, learned Senior counsel for the
petitioners has relied upon the following judgments;
(i) Radhey Shyam Vs. State of Haryana and Others
- 2022 SCC Online SC 1935;
(ii) Abhishek Singh Chauhan Vs. Union of India
and Others -2022 SCC Online SC 1936.
(iii) N.V.Sharma Vs. Union of India and Ors. in
Misc Application No.1238/2022 in Writ Petition (Crl.)
No.239/2022 Dated 10.08.2022.
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
6. Per contra, the learned HCGP for the respondents
submits that there is no merit in the petition and the same is liable
to be dismissed.
7. In the case of Radhey Shyam's case supra, the Apex
Court held as under:-
"5. Following the exposition of this Court in Amish
Devgan v. Union of India, we deem it appropriate in
exercise of power under Article 142 of the Constitution of
India, to direct clubbing of all the FIRs, which can proceed
together for one trial as far as possible, as we are of the
opinion that multiplicity of the proceedings will not be in the
larger public interest. We may hasten to add that all the
States have no objection for abiding with such
dispensation.
6. The FIRs, referred to above, filed in different
States under the Penal Code, 1860, can proceed as one
set of complaint treating FIR No. 710/2018 dated
30.08.2018 as the principal FIR. The FIRs registered
subsequently in the State of Telangana and other States
(except States of Haryana, Madhya Pradesh and
Maharashtra), shall stand clubbed with the stated FIR No.
710/2018 and treated as statement under Section 161 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure. The investigating officer in
criminal case arising from FIR No. 710/2018 will be free to
file supplementary charge sheet after collation of all the
records concerning other FIRs, which are clubbed in terms
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
of this order. In the event, the Investigating Officer in other
FIRs had already filed the Police report under Section 173
of the Code of Criminal Procedure before the concerned
Court and the concerned Court had taken cognizance
thereof, the said FIRs and criminal cases would also stand
transferred and merged/clubbed along with case arising
from FIR No. 710/2018, to be proceeded with in
accordance with law. The investigating officer in the stated
case (Principal case) will be free to file supplementary
charge sheet on the basis of material collated during
investigation of other FIRs.
7. As regards the FIRs registered in the States
having special enactments, the first FIR registered in the
concerned State be treated as principal criminal case; and
the remaining FIRs and criminal case in that State shall
stand clubbed/merged with the principal FIR/criminal case
and proceeded as one case, including with liberty to the
Investigating Officer in connection with the principal FIR to
file supplementary charge sheet after collation of all
records.
8. Needless to observe that the other offences not
part of special enactment can also be tried by the Special
Court under the concerned State Legislation.
9. In other words, all cases in the State of Haryana
will stand clubbed with FIR No. 358/2018 dated
08.09.2018, registered with Police Station Sadar, District
Fatehabad, and be tried by Special Court at Fatehabad
(Haryana). Similarly, all criminal cases arising from the
FIRs filed at the different point of time in the State of
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
Madhya Pradesh will stand clubbed with FIR No. 198/2019
dated 25.03.2019, registered with Police Station Neemuch
Cantt., District Neemuch - to be tried by Special Court,
Neemuch (Madhya Pradesh) and in the State of
Maharashtra on the same lines will stand clubbed with FIR
No. 146/2018 dated 26.11.2018 registered with Police
Station Chalisgaon Road, District Dhule - to be tried by
Special Court at Dhule (Maharashtra).
10. It is clarified that if the first FIR in the States of
Haryana, Maharashtra and Madhya Pradesh, respectively,
is registered in respect of offence under the general law
and not special enactment, but as the subsequent FIRs are
registered in connection with the special law offence, the
same after clubbing must be tried under the special law by
the Special Court(s).
11. It is also made clear that this direction is limited
to general offences and not offences under the Prevention
of Money Laundering Act, 2002, which has to proceed
under a separate legislation and of which investigation is
done by a separate investigating agency.
12. If any accused has been granted bail in
connection with the principal FIR or criminal case arising
therefrom, in which the other FIRs/criminal cases will stand
clubbed/merged in terms of this order, the bail so granted
must enure in his/her favour (of such accused) until the
Court of competent jurisdiction cancels the same owing to
supervening circumstances including breach of bail
conditions.
- 10 -
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
13. Needless to observe that since the first FIR
registered in the State of Maharashtra is limited to offence
under the Penal Code, 1860, but the subsequent FIR(s)
contains allegation constituting offence under the special
enactment, it will be open to the Court trying the first case,
which would stand transferred to Special Court at Dhule
(Maharashtra) in terms of this order, to insist for fresh bail
application by the concerned accused in relation to
offences under the special Act. That application can be
decided on its own merits and in accordance with law."
8. So also, in the case of Abhishek Singh's case supra,
the Apex Court held as under:-
"4. The cases in the concerned States, to be tried
by the Special Court can be conveniently clubbed, for
being tried together as has been directed in the case of
Radhey Shyam v. State of Haryana in Writ Petition (Crl.)
No. 75/2020 vide Order dated 12.05.2022.
5. Following the exposition of this Court in Amish
Devgan v. Union of India, we deem it appropriate in
exercise of power under Article 142 of the Constitution of
India, to direct clubbing of all the FIRs State-wise, which
can proceed together for one trial as far as possible, as
we are of the opinion that multiplicity of the proceedings
will not be in the larger public interest. We may hasten to
add that the concerned States have no objection for
abiding with such dispensation.
6. In other words, the offence registered in the
State of West Bengal being RC/40/S/2014 dated
- 11 -
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
05.06.2015 registered with CBI/SCB/SIT, Kolkata, will
proceed before the concerned Court in the State of West
Bengal independently. Similarly, the FIR registered at
Pindwara, Sirohi, State of Rajasthan being FIR No.
338/2018 dated 12.09.2018 shall proceed before the
concerned jurisdictional Court in that State itself being the
only case registered in connection with the Penal Code,
1860 (IPC) offences in that State and cannot be clubbed
with the cases pending in other States, as the same will
have to proceed under the special enactment of the
concerned State.
7. As regards three cases registered in the State of
Maharashtra, the same will have to proceed under the
special enactment before the special Court. It can be
conveniently proceeded together. Accordingly, the
subsequently registered FIRs being FIR Nos. 533/2017
dated 29.07.2017 registered at Nahol, Sholapur and
467/2017 dated 08.08.2017 registered at Bijapur Naka,
Sholapur, need to be clubbed with FIR No. 552/2016
dated 15.04.2016 registered at Ramnagar, Chandrapur.
8. On the same pattern, the subsequently
registered two FIRs in the State of Madhya Pradesh need
to proceed together with FIR No. 915/2016 dated
09.11.2016 registered at Kotwali, Sehore being the
earliest FIR registered under the special enactment,
before the jurisdictional special Court at Sehore.
9. Similarly, the subsequently registered FIRs in the
State of Chhattisgarh need to be clubbed with FIR No.
146/2017 dated 04.04.2017 registered at Surajpur, Distt.
- 12 -
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
Surajpur under the special enactment6 as applicable to
the State of Chhattisgarh, to be tried by the jurisdictional
special Court at Surajpur, Distt. Surajpur.
10. In each of the States, where directions for
clubbing of FIRs is being passed, the subsequently
registered FIRs shall be treated as statements under
Section 161 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (Cr.P.C.).
The investigating officer in criminal case arising from the
first FIR in the concerned State, as referred to above, will
be free to file supplementary charge sheet after collation
of all the records concerning other FIRs in the respective
States, which are clubbed in terms of this order. In the
event, the investigating officer in other FIRs had already
filed the police report under Section 173 of the Cr. P.C.
before the concerned Court and the concerned Court had
taken cognizance thereof, the said FIRs and criminal
cases would also stand transferred and merged/clubbed
alongwith the first criminal case registered in the
respective State, as referred to above, to be proceeded
with in accordance with law. The investigating officer in
the stated case (principal case to which the subsequent
FIRs would stand merged/clubbed), will be free to file
supplementary chargesheet on the basis of material
collated during investigation of other FIRs.
11. Needless to observe that the other offences not
part of the special enactments can also be tried by the
special Court under the concerned State legislation.
12. It is clarified that this direction is limited to
general offences, the offences under the IPC and the
- 13 -
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
offences under the special State legislations; and not
offences concerning the Prevention of Money Laundering
Act (PMLA), 2002, which have to proceed under a
separate legislation and of which the investigation is done
by a separate investigating agency.
13. In other words, all cases in the State of
Maharashtra will stand clubbed with FIR No. 552/2016
dated 15.04.2016, registered with Police Station
Ramnagar, Chandrapur, and to be tried by Special Court
at Chandrapur (Maharashtra). Similarly, all criminal cases
arising from the FIRs filed at the different point of time in
the State of Madhya Pradesh will stand clubbed with FIR
No. 915/2016 dated 09.11.2016, registered with Police
Station Kotwali, Sehore - to be tried by Special Court,
Sehore (Madhya Pradesh); and in the State of
Chhattisgarh on the same lines will stand clubbed with
FIR No. 146/2017 dated 04.04.2017 registered with
Police Station Surajpur - to be tried by Special Court at
Surajpur (Chhattisgarh).
14. If the accused has been granted bail in
connection with the principal FIR or criminal case arising
therefrom, in which the other FIRs/criminal cases will stand
clubbed/merged in terms of this order, the bail so granted
must enure in his favour until the Court of competent
jurisdiction cancels the same owing to supervening
circumstances including breach of bail conditions. In case,
no bail has been granted in the principal FIR (case), the
appellant may apply for the same before the jurisdictional
court competent to try the principal crime. That be decided
on its own merits."
- 14 -
NC: 2025:KHC:1859
7. The material on record discloses that while FIR in Crime
No.372/2017 dated 20.06.2017, pursuant to which, charge sheet
dated 21.01.2020 is pending against the petitioners before the IV
ACMM, Bangalore, the remaining proceedings are pending before
the respective courts at Hubbali, Dharwad, Chickballapur, Karwar,
Udupi, Haveri, Koppal and Chitradurga. In view of the aforesaid
facts and circumstances of the case and the principles laid down in
the aforesaid judgments of the Apex Court, I deem it just and
appropriate to exercise my powers under Article 227 of the
Constitution of India and dispose of the petition directing all the
aforesaid cases except the proceedings in Crime No.372/2017 to
be withdrawn from the respective courts and clubbed, consolidated,
tried and disposed of by the IV Additional Chief Metropolitan
Magistrate, Bengaluru, before whom the said proceedings arising
out of Crime No.372/2017 is pending in accordance with law.
8. Subject to the aforesaid directions, petition stands
disposed of.
SD/-
(S.R.KRISHNA KUMAR)
JUDGE
RB/SRL
