JABBAR Vs. STATE OF HARYANA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) INSTANT petition has been preferred under Section 482 Cr.P.C for setting aside impugned order dated April 22, 2014 passed by learned Sessions Judge, Palwal on application for clubbing criminal complaint No. 316 dated October 31, 2012 captioned as Jabbar vs. Udaiveer etc pending in the Court of learned Judicial Magistrate Ist Class, Palwal and Sessions case No. 44 of 2013 arising out of FIR No. 99 of 2012 registered at Police Station Chandhat, Palwal captioned as State vs. Fakira and others, has been dismissed.

(2.) THE contention of learned counsel for petitioner is that on May 12, 2012, Ravinder -respondent No.3 got registered a case bearing FIR No. 99 dated May 12, 2012 under Sections 148, 149, 323, 324, 452, 506, 427 and 307 IPC, Police Station Chandhat, District Palwal on the allegations that petitioner as well as respondents No.8 to 14 caused injuries to him, Udaiveer and Jai Singh on May 11, 2012 at about 8.00/9.00 PM. Petitioner lodged a complaint under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. against respondents No.2 to 7 with averment that they caused injuries to him, Dilshad and Munni on May 11, 2012 at about 5.00/6.00 PM. The said complaint is fixed for recording pre -charge evidence. During pendency of both above -referred proceedings, petitioner moved an application before learned Sessions Judge, Palwal for clubbing both the cases to avoid conflicting judgments as both the cases are outcome of same incident. The said application has been wrongly and illegally dismissed by learned trial Court.

(3.) SINCE , both the cases arose out of same incident but are being tried by two different courts, there is every risk that two different courts may come to conflict in recording findings and to obviate such risk, it is desirable that both cases should be dealt with, tried and disposed of by the same court. To buttress this contention, learned counsel for the petitioner has placed reliance upon Amarjit Singh vs. State of Haryana, 2012 2 RCR(Cri) 635.