PRADEEP GUPTA Vs. STATE OF U.P.

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned A.G.A. and also perused the materials on record.

(2.) This petition under Art. 226 of the Constitution of India has been brought for quashing the order dated 12.9.2000 passed by the Chief Judicial Magistrate, Meerut whereby consolidating the (1) Crime No. 280/93 (Case No. 3436/93) with Crime No. 281/93 (Case No. 3422/2000), Crime No. 285/93 (Case No. 3434/2000) and making case Crime No. 280/93 to be the leading Case (2) Crime No. 282/93 (Case No. 3433/2000) with Crime No. 283/93 (Case No. 3429/2000) and making Case crime No. 282/93 to be the leading case (3) Crime No. 237/93 (Case No. 3431/2000) with Crime No. 288/93 (Case No. 3430/2000), Crime No. 289/93 (Case No. 3432/2000) and making crime No. 237/93 to be the leading case (4) Crime No. 279/93 (case No. 3424/2000) with Crime No. 284/93 (Case No. 3935/2000), Case Crime No. 286/93 (Case No. 3423/2000) and making Crime No. 279/93 to be the leading case. Further for quashing the order of the learned Sessions Judge passed on 17.2.2003 affirming such clubbing of the cases in Criminal Revision No. 525/2000.

(3.) It has been contended by the petitioner that eleven persons belonging to the same family lodged first information reports separately at Police Station Sadar Bazar, Meerut under Sections 406, 420, 323, 504 and 506, I.P.C. which were registered at Crime Case No. 279 to 289 of 1993. Almost identical allegations were made in these reports about the Maar-Peet and threats given by the accused. The motive behind such Maar-Peet was non-refund of the money invested by all the eleven persons (complainants) of the same family in Shiva Financing Company, 171Y, Abu Lane, Meerut Cantonment, Meerut (hereinafter referred as company). Police after investigation submitted charge-sheet separately in all the eleven cases. The detail of the deposits with the company which was the cause of incident is given below: <FRM>JUDGEMENT_290_LAWS(ALL)5_2003_1.html</FRM>