GANGADHARAN SARADA PRASANTH Vs. STATE OF GUJARAT

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard learned advocate Ms.Mini Nair and Mr.Zainab Bharmal on behalf of the petitioners, learned A.P.P. Ms.M.D.Mehta for the respondent State and learned advocate Mr.Dipak R.Dave for the respondent no.2.

(2.) Both these petitions call into question complaints filed by the respondent no.2 arraigning the present applicants as the accused, for the issues arising out of the same transactions and therefore, both the petitions are decided together by way of the present common judgment.

(3.) It would be pertinent to mention here that the only discernible difference in the impugned complaints being that the complaint impugned in Special Criminal Application No.1831 of 2014 being Criminal Complaint No.4736 of 2013 filed before the learned Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) and the complaint impugned in Special Criminal Application No.1833 of 2014 being Criminal Complaint No.4737 of 2013 before the Judicial Magistrate First Class, Ahmedabad (Rural) being the fact that the former complaint is with regard to the transaction of dealership given by the complainant to the accused for Calicut District whereas the later complaint is for dealership at Pallakkad District.