K.S.PALANICHAMY Vs. STATE

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This Revision Petition is filed against the order passed by the learned Special Judge for TNPID Act cases at Madurai in C.C.No.24 of 2013 dtd. 8/4/2013.

(2.) The learned counsel appearing for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner herein had been arrayed as an accused in the case pending before the learned Special Judge for TNPID Act cases, Madurai. It is the contention of the learned counsel for the petitioner that already a case was registered against the petitioner by Economic Offence Wing and in this regard, investigation has already been completed and a charge sheet has also been filed before the learned Special Judge for TNPID Act cases, Madurai. Subsequently, A2, who had been running the Company, was arrayed as an accused in yet another criminal case by the Economic Offence Wing, Dindugal. The very same Company is an accused under the Economic Offence Wing, Dindugal under TNPID Act cases. Now, there are two cases pending against the very same person for the very same offences. Therefore, the learned counsel seeks appropriate orders from this Court, clubbing the subject matter in the charge sheet of two cases, so that only one case can be proceeded against the petitioner. Two charge sheets were framed for the same offence by two Investigation Officers of the Economic Offence Wing. One by Economic Offence Wing, Dindugal and another by Economic Offence Wing, Madurai.

(3.) The learned counsel would further contend that the Investigation Officer may be directed to club the offences into one single charge sheet, since the offences are same, the company is same, the accused are same and only the witnesses are vary. He would rely on the decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Andhra Pradesh reported in CDJ 2015 APHC 481 (Veerabhadram Vislavath Vs. The State of Andhra Pradesh and another), wherein, in paragraph No.7, it had been discussed as follows:-