Multiplicity of proceedings not in larger Public Interest : SC directs clubbing of FIRs State-Wise against an accused

 

The Supreme Court recently comprising of a bench of Justices AM Khanwilkar and JB Pardiwala while observing that multiplicity of proceedings was not in larger public interest, has exercised its special power and allowed consolidation of multiple FIRs, the consequential trial to one court in Greater Noida in relation to the multi-crore rupees alleged Bike Bot' and "Grand Venice Mall" scams. (Abhishek Singh Chauhan vs Union of India)

Facts of the case 

In the present case, one Abhishek Singh had approached the Court filing a writ petition seeking clubbing of all the FIRs registered in different States. Against him, FIRs have been lodged under various provisions of the Indian Penal Code including Section 420 IPC and other State enactments. Further, a number of FIRs have been lodged under prize chits and money circulation schemes (Banning Act, 1978) in West Bengal, under Maharashtra Protection of Interest of Depositors (in Financial Establishments) Act, 1999 in Maharashtra, under Madhya Pradesh Investor Protection Act, 2000 in  Madhya Pradesh, and under Chhattisgarh Protection of Depositors Interest Act, 2005 in Chhattisgarh.

 

Courts Observation and Judgment 

The bench while ordering clubbing of the FIR ordered, "We are also of the opinion that multiplicity of proceedings will not be in the larger public interest as well.

 

In the peculiar facts of the present case, we, in exercise of power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India, accede to the relief claimed in terms of the prayer clause pertaining to consolidation of all FIRs, including registered in New Delhi, with FIR No.206/2019 as the principal FIR and for being proceeded with in accordance with law."\

The bench observed, "Although, diverse reliefs have been claimed in these writ petitions, the learned counsel appearing for the parties have broadly agreed that they would confine the relief of clubbing of multiple FIRs in respect of Bike Bot Scheme with the principal FIR bearing No... registered at Police Station Dadri, District Gautam Budh Nagar, Uttar Pradesh."

The court observed that 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 vs. State of Haryana. 

"Following the exposition of this Court in Amish Devgan vs. Union of India & Ors., 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."

The bench further observed, "It is clarified that this direction is limited to general offences, the offences under the IPC and the 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. 

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)."

 

Social media is bold.

Social media is young.

Social media raises questions.

 Social media is not satisfied with an answer.

Social media looks at the big picture.

 Social media is interested in every detail.

social media is curious.

 Social media is free.

Social media is irreplaceable.

But never irrelevant.

Social media is you.

(With input from news agency language)

 If you like this story, share it with a friend!  

We are a non-profit organization. Help us financially to keep our journalism free from government and corporate pressure