MALLU Vs. STATE OF KARNATAKA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners in all the above said cases are the accused persons arraigned in different Crime Numbers.

(2.) It is contended by the learned counsel for the petitioners that though all the above said crime numbers including the cases in which the charge sheets have been filed in C.C. No. 2053/2014 and 2054/2014 arising out of the Crime Nos. 138/2014 and 137/2014 on the file of the Gandhi Chowk Police Station in respect of the same transaction and incident, the police have registered different crime numbers in order to cause inconvenience to the accused persons. Therefore, it is contended that the alleged offences committed by all the above accused persons (petitioners) ought to have been consolidated and ought to have been filed one comprehensive charge sheet and should not have registered different crime numbers and investigated independently by filing separate charge sheets on the basis of each and individual crime number.

(3.) Learned Additional S.P.P. who is appearing for the State in all the above said cases defended Gandhi Chowk Police submitting that, though the incident has happened on 25.06.2014, the time of the incident is shown as between 5.30 to 6.00 p.m., but there are different acts alleged against different accused persons and the aggrieved persons are also different. Therefore, they have filed independent complaints, as such, the police have registered independent crime numbers. Though he contends that independent complaints are registered, but incident and object of the incident are of one and the same transaction and it happened between 5.30 to 6.00 p.m. on that particular day. Therefore, he submits that if the Court comes to the conclusion that the whole incident has taken place constituting common transaction, the Court may issue appropriate direction to the jurisdictional Court as well as to the jurisdictional police in this regard.