Amber Khare vs The State Of Telangana
2023 Latest Caselaw 4009 Tel

     THE HON'BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V.BHASKAR REDDY

  WRIT PETITION No.24531, 24533, 24534, 24535,
 24537, 24539, 24544, 24545, 24546, 24548, 24549,
 24552, 24553, 24556, 24557, 24558, 24561, 24562,
 24563, 24566, 24570, 24572, 24573, 24579, 24587,
 24597, 24614, 24624, 24626, 25416, 25434, 25438,
   25444, 25449, 25511, 26988, 26997, 27064 and
                  27140 of 2023

COMMON ORDER:
       Since all these writ petitions have been filed aggrieved

by the action of the respondents police in not registering

the complaints lodged by the petitioners against

the unofficial respondents i.e., M/s. Jayathri

Infrastructures India Pvt. Ltd. and its Directors, they are

being disposed of by this common order.

2. The facts of W.P.No.24531 of 2023, which is taken as

the lead case, are set out as follows:-

The case of the petitioner is that respondent No.6

herein i.e., M/s. Jayathri Infrastructures India Pvt. Ltd.

has been incorporated under the provisions of the

Companies Act, 2013, respondent No.7 is its Managing

Director and respondent Nos.8 and 9 are his wife and son

respectively. It is the further case of the petitioner that

respondent Nos.6 to 9 in collusion with each other hatched

a criminal conspiracy with a common intention and sole

object to cheat the petitioner and other innocent public to

invest amounts in their company project viz., Mount Bay

across the Hyderabad for development of the lands. As

such on the assurance given by the said Company and its

Directors that they will develop the property within 24

months and then the same will get attractive market value

and the investors would be benefitted with double the

amount invested in the said company, the petitioner fell

into the trap of respondent No.6 and its Directors and

purchased land in Survey No.200/17/A.12 admeasuring

Ac.0.14 guntas situated at Somarajuguda Village, Marri

Guda Mandal, Nalgonda District by investing an amount of

Rs.6,33,000/-. Accordingly respondent Nos.7 to 9

executed a Memorandum of Undertaking (MoU) dated

25.07.2021 in favour of the petitioner. It is contention of

the petitioner that many other middle-class and upper-

middle-class people also invested their hard earnings in the

said project with a hope that they will get good returns for

their investments.

2.1. The grievance of the petitioner is that when he came

to know that respondent Nos.6 to 9 cheated him and

committed breach of trust and when there is no

development activity that has been undertaken in

pursuance of the MoU executed in his favour by

respondent Nos.6 to 9 dated 25.07.2021, he was

constrained to lodge a complaint dated 14.08.2023 stating

the said facts on the file of respondent No.4 i.e, Station

House Officer, KPHB Police Station, but even though the

said complaint reveals cognisable offence, so far the

respondents police have not acted upon the same, which

is illegal, arbitrary and contrary to the law laid down by the

Supreme Court in the case of Lalitha Kumari vs. State of

Uttar Pradesh 1.

3. A counter affidavit has been filed by the Inspector of

Police, KPHB Police Station, Cyberabad, inter alia stating

that on receipt of the complaints dated 14.08.2023,

16.08.2023 and 28.02.2023 lodged by the petitioners

herein, respondent No.4 has made entry for enquiry and

(2014) 2 SCC 1

investigation; while so, other similarly situated persons

who are said to have been fell into the trap of respondent

Nos.6 to 9 have filed various complaints on the file of the

concerned police stations alleging that respondent No.6

represented by respondent No.7 and others have cheated

them by collecting crores of rupees for their wrongful gains;

acting upon the said complaints, various cases were

registered against respondent Nos.6 to 9, vide (i) Crime

No.202 of 2022 for the offences punishable under Sections

406, 420, 506 read with 34 of IPC and Section 156(3) of

Cr.P.C, (ii) Crime No.278 of 2022 under Sections 504 and

506 of IPC, (iii) Crime No.459 of 2022 under Sections 420

and 406 of IPC, (iv) Crime No.798 of 2022 under Sections

420 and 406 IPC, (v) Crime No.904 of 2022 under Sections

406 and 420 read with 34 of IPC, (vi) Crime No.1003 of

2022 under Sections 420, 406 read with 34 of IPC, (vii)

Crime No.1045 of 2022 under Sections 406 and 420 of IPC

and Section 5 of Telangana State Protection of Depositors

of Financial Establishments Act, (viii) Crime No.49 of 2023

under Sections 504 and 506 of IPC (ix) Crime No.125 of

2023 under Sections 406, 420 read with Section 34 of IPC

and Section 5 of Telangana State Protection of Depositors

of Financial Establishments Act, (x) Crime No.647 of 2023

under Sections 406 and 420 read with 34 of IPC and

Section 5 of Telangana State Protection of Depositors of

Financial Establishments Act on the file of KPHB Police

Station; during the course of investigation, on 25.01.2023

respondent No.7 herein, who is accused No.1 viz., Kakarla

Srinivas was arrested in connection with Crime No.1045 of

2022; he admitted his guilt in committing the offences in

the abovementioned crimes; his detailed confession

statement was recorded; thereafter he was produced before

the Court of XV Metropolitan Magistrate at Kukatpally and

was remanded to judicial custody; after knowing the said

fact of arrest and judicial remand, the petitioners in this

batch of writ petitions claiming to be the victims being

cheated by respondent Nos.6 to 9 have approached

respondent No.4 and lodged written complaints dated

14.08.2023, 16.08.2023 and 28.08.2023 requesting to take

necessary action; since the grievance of the petitioners is

one and the same and as already respondent No.7 was

arrested in Crime No.1045 of 2022 for similar offences,

respondent No.4 has intended to record the statements of

all the petitioners herein in the above crime by citing them

as witnesses instead of registering multiple FIRs against

same accused; respondent No.4 will record the statements

under Section 161(3) of Cr.P.C of all the petitioners in this

batch of writ petitions in the above crime by duly

addressing their grievances as contended in the writ

petitions.

4. Heard learned counsel for the parties and perused

the record.

5. A learned Single Judge of this Court in similar

matters i.e., W.P.No.45620 of 2022 and batch, while

following the guidelines issued by the Hon'ble Supreme

Court in Lalitha Kumari's case (1 supra), disposed of the

writ petitions vide common order dated 29.12.2022

directing the respondents police concerned to register the

complaints lodged by the petitioners therein in connection

with the company involved in the said cases and

transferred the FIRs to the Central Crime Station, Detective

Department, Hyderabad, for joint investigation in all the

crimes. Questioning the said order, writ appeals came to

be filed before this Court vide W.A.No.80 of 2023 and batch

and the Hon'ble Division Bench, duly taking into

consideration the judgment of the Supreme Court in Ram

Kishan Fauji vs. State of Haryana 2 disposed of the said

batch of writ appeals vide judgment dated 10.02.2023, the

relevant portion of which reads as follows:-

"6. It is trite law that there cannot be multiple F.l.Rs. in respect of a single offence. The law is well settled that even if multiple F.l.Rs. are filed, the subsequent F.l.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."

6. In the present batch of cases, the grievance of the

petitioners is similar to that of the cases referred to above

that the Managing Director and promoters of M/s. Jayathri

Infrastructures India Pvt. Ltd cheated them by collecting

huge amounts and therefore they are liable for prosecution

in accordance with law. Since the Division Bench of this

Court in similar circumstances as mentioned above in

(2017) 5 SCC 533

W.A.No.80 of 2023 and batch observed that there cannot

be multiple FIRs in respect of a single offence and law is

well settled that even if multiple FIRs are filed, the

subsequent FIRs should be treated as statement made

under Section 162 of Cr.P.C and transmitted to the Police

Station where the lead case is being investigated, this

Court also deems it appropriate to direct the respondents

police concerned to register and transfer all the cases in

connection with M/s. Jayathri Infrastructures India Pvt.

Ltd to the police station, where the lead case in this batch

of cases is registered, for joint investigation.

7. Learned Government Pleader for Home submits that

so far in this batch of cases, the lead case registered being

Crime No.1045 of 2022 on the file of Station House Officer,

KPHB Police Station, all the cases filed in connection with

M/s. Jayathri Infrastructures India Pvt. Ltd may be

directed to be transferred to KPHB Police Station,

Cyberabad.

8. Resultantly, all these writ petitions are disposed of

directing the respondents police concerned to register the

complaints lodged by the petitioners in connection with

M/s. Jayathri Infrastructures India Pvt. Ltd and transfer

the same to KPHB Police Station, Cyberabad, where the

lead case i.e., Crime No.1045 of 2022 is pending, for joint

investigation in all the crimes. The Investigating Officer is

directed to record the statements of the complainants

under Section 162 of Cr.P.C and proceed with the

investigation strictly in conformity with the provisions of

the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, if necessary by

taking the assistance of the Economic Offences Wing,

Cyberabad, for early and effective investigation, and file

charge sheet against the accused in the said crimes as

expeditiously as possible preferably within a period of three

months from the date of receipt of a copy of this order.

Pending miscellaneous applications, if any, shall

stand closed. There shall be no order as to costs.

_________________________ C.V.BHASKAR REDDY, J 15.11.2023 JSU