Bombay High Court
Bhalla @ Mahadev Sable And Ors vs The State Of Maharashtra And Anr on 20 April, 2021
Author: Manish Pitale
Bench: S. S. Shinde, Manish Pitale
1/3 35-WP-1760-2021.doc
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
CRIMINAL APPELLATE JURISDICTION
CRIMINAL WRIT PETITION NO. 1760 OF 2021
Bhalla @ Mahadev Sable & Ors. ...Petitioners
Versus
The State of Maharashtra & Anr. ...Respondents
...
Mr. Karan Kadam i/by. Mr. S.S. Bedekar for Petitioner.
Mr. Deepak Thakre, PP a/w. Mr. J P Yagnik, APP for State.
...
CORAM : S. S. SHINDE &
MANISH PITALE, JJ.
DATE : 20th APRIL, 2021. P.C.:
1. Learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner seeks liberty to file compilation of additional documents. Leave is granted to file compilation of additional documents, however, without prejudice to the contentions of respondents.
2. Issue notice to the Respondents.
3. In addition to service of notice through Court, the Petitioners shall serve a private notice by Registered Post A.D. and/or by Courier service and/or by hand delivery or by e-mail/fax on the Respondent No. 2 and shall file affidavit of service with tangible proof before the returnable date.
4. The learned APP Mr. J.P. Yagnik waives service of notice on behalf of Respondent No.1 - State.
Bhagyawant Punde
::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/09/2021 20:06:42 :::
2/3 35-WP-1760-2021.doc
5. It is argued by the learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner that in respect of Seva Vikas Bank Ltd. on same set of allegations more than one FIR are registered and even in case of some of the accused, multiple FIR have been registered. It is submitted that on same set of allegations and on the basis of same incidents, multiple FIR cannot be registered. In support of aforesaid contention, learned counsel appearing for the Petitioner placed reliance on the exposition in the case of T.T. Antony Vs. State of Kerala (Appeal (Crl.) No. 689 of 2001) and Amitbhai Anilchandra Shah Vs. Central Bureau of Investigation & Anr.(Writ Petition (Criminal) No. 149 of 2012).
6. We have come across various writ petitions pertaining to the affairs of said bank, and it prima facie appears that, the investigating officers are registering the FIR mechanically without verifying that whether the new complaint/complaints are filed on the same set of allegations about same incident, as alleged in the earlier FIR's or said complaints are about different incidents. As a result, one accused has filed more than one writ petition for quashing the FIR and this Court is over-flooded by such writ petitions on the ground that, on same set of allegations at the instance of different persons, multiple FIR's have been registered. In that view of the matter we deem it appropriate to impress upon the investigating officers to carefully look into the contents of new complaint/complaints which would be received in future, in respect of affairs of said bank, and then take considered/conscious Bhagyawant Punde ::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/09/2021 20:06:42 ::: 3/3 35-WP-1760-2021.doc decision, whether to register the new FIR or consider the said allegations in the FIR already registered on same set of allegations.
7. To be heard with Writ Petition No. 4134 of 2019 (Amarjeetsingh Basi Vs. State of Maharashtra & Anr) and connected writ petitions.
( MANISH PITALE, J.) (S. S. SHINDE, J.)
Bhagyawant Punde
::: Uploaded on - 20/04/2021 ::: Downloaded on - 07/09/2021 20:06:42 :::