Karnataka High Court
Rudragouda Patil @ R.D. Patil vs State Of Karnataka And Anr on 27 September, 2022
Author: P.N.Desai
Bench: P.N.Desai
1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
KALABURAGI BENCH
DATED THIS THE 27TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2022
BEFORE
THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE P.N.DESAI
[[
CRIMINAL PETITION NO.200948 /2022
C/W
CRL.P. NO.200700/2022, CRL.P. NO.200701/2022,
CRL.P. NO.201151/2022, CRL.P. NO.201152/2022,
CRL.P. NO.201153/2022, CRL.P. NO.201154/2022 &
CRL.P.NO.201155/2022
IN CRL.P. NO.200948/2022
BETWEEN:
RUDRAGOUDAPATIL @ RDPATIL,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
S/O. DEVENDRAPPA PATIL,
RESIDENT OF NO.42, HIGI,
EAST WING, HALEBIDDAPURA
AIRPORT LAND,
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY,
KALABURAGI - 585 102
...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. RAVI B.NAIK, SENIOR COUNSEL
SHRI. SANJAY KULKARNI, ADVOCATE)
AND:
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA
THROUGH STATION HOUSE OFFICER
CHOWK BAZAAR POLICE STATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS ADDITIONAL STATE
PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
KALABURAGI BENCH,
KALABURAGI - 585101
2. SRI. K.H.DILEEP KUMAR,
INSPECTOR, FIU, CID,
BENGALURU - 560 001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. KIRAN S.JAVALI, SR.COUNSEL - SPP FOR
SHRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPAIL, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED.)
2
THIS CRIMINAL PETITION IS FILED UNDER SECTION 482
OF THE CODE OF CRIMINAL PROCEDURE, 1973, SEEKING TO
QUASH THE FIRST INFORMATION REPORT IN CRIME
NO.48/2022 DATED 09.04.2022 REGISTERED AT CHOWK
POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI AND CHARGE SHEET IN
C.C.NO.14774/2022 FILED BY THE RESPONDENT POLICE FOR
THE OFFENCES WHICH ARE MADE PENAL UNDER SECTIONS
109, 114, 119, 120(B), 201, 202, 204, 212, 409, 411, 420, 465,
468, 471 R/W SEC.34, 36, 37 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN.)
AND JMFC COURT, KALABURAGI AND ALSO QUASH ALL THE
FURTHER PROCEEDINGS THEREIN, IN THE INTERST OF
JUSTICE.
IN CRL.P.NO.200700/2022
BETWEEN
RUDRAGOUDA PATIL @ R.D. PATIL
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
S/O. DEVENDRAPPA PATIL,
RESIDENT OF THE PREMISES,
BEARING NO. 42, HIG-1,
EAST WING, HALE BIDDAPURA ,
AIRPORT LAND,
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY,
GULBARGA -585 102
...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. ASHOK B.MULAGE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
STATION BAZAR POLICE STATION,
GULBARGA,
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA - 585107
3
2. SRI. PRAKASH RATHOD,
DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
CID UNIT,
BENGALURU CITY -1
KARNATAKA
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. KIRAN S.JAVALI, SR.COUNSEL - SPP
FOR SHRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPAIL, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED.)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO, QUASH THE FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT IN CRIME NO.57/2022 DATED 02.05.2022 REGISTERED
AT STATION BAZAR POLICE STATION, KALABURLAGI, FOR
OFFENCES WHICH ARE MADE UNDER SECTIONS 120-B, 409,
420 R/W SEC. 34, 36 AND 37 OF IPC, PENDING ON THE FILE OF
THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR DIVISION) AND JMFC COURT,
KALABURAGI, IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
IN CRL.P. NO.200701/2022
BETWEEN
RUDRAGOUDA PATIL @ R.D. PATIL
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
S/O. DEVENDRAPPA PATIL,
RESIDENT OF THE PREMISES
BEARING NO.42, HIG-1
EAST WING, HALE BIDDAPURA,
AIRPORT LAND,
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY,
GULBARGA - 585 102
...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. ASHOK B. MULAGE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA AND ANR
BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
STATION BAZAAR POLICE STATION,
GULBARGA,
REPRESENTED BY
ADDL. STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA 585107
4
2. SRI. PRAKASH RATHOD
DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT OF POLICE,
CID UNIT,
BENGALURU CITY-01
KARNATAKA
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. KIRAN S.JAVALI, SR.COUNSEL - SPP FOR
SHRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPAIL, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED.)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO, QUASH THE FIRST INFORMATION
REPORT IN CRIME NO.79/2022 DATED 08.06.2022 REGISTERED
AT STATION BAZAR POLICE STATION, KALABURALGI, FOR
OFFENCES WHICH ARE MADE UNDER SECTIONS 120(B), 201,
204, 409, 420 R/W SEC.34, 36 AND 37 OF IPC, PENDING ON
THE FILE OF THE PRL. CIVIL JUDGE (JR.DN) AND JMFC, COURT,
AT KALABURAGI IN THE ENDS OF JUSTICE.
IN CRL.P.NO.201151/2022
BETWEEN
RUDRAGOUDA PATIL @ R.D.PATIL,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
S/O. DEVENDRAPPA PATIL,
RESIDENT OF THE PREMISES,
BEARING NO.42, HIG-1,
EAST WING, HALE BIDDAPUR,
AIRPORT LAND,
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY,
GULBARGA - 585102
...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. ASHOK B.MULAGE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION,
GULBARGA,
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA,
GULBARGA - 585107
5
2. SRI. SHIVAPRASAD NELLUR,
DETECTIVE SUB-INSPECTOR,
C.C.D, C.I.D, BENGALURU
KARNATAKA - 500001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. KIRAN S.JAVALI, SPP - SR.COUNSEL FOR
SHRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPAIL, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED.)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO, A) QUASH THE FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT (F.I.R) AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME
NO.96/2022 DATED 04.08.2022 REGISTERED AT ASHOK NAGAR
POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI, FOR OFFENCES WHICH ARE
MADE UNDER SECTIONS 109, 114, 120-B, 409, 420 READ WITH
SECTIONS 34, 36, 37 AND 149 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE,
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE Vth ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR
DIVISION) AND J.M.F.C. KALABURAGI.
IN CRL.P. NO.201152/2022
BETWEEN
RUDRAGOUDA PATIL @ R.D.PATIL,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
S/O. DEVENDRAPPA PATIL,
RESIDENT OF THE PREMISES,
BEARING NO. 42, HIG-1,
EAST WING, HALE BIDDAPURA,
AIRPORT LAND,
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY,
GULBARGA -585102
...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. ASHOK B. MULAGE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION,
GULBARGA,
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
6
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA.
2. SRI. SHIVAPRASAD NELLUR,
DETECTIVE SUB-INSPECTOR,
C.C.D, C.I.D, BENGALURU
KARNATAKA
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. KIRAN S.JAVALI, SR.COUNSEL - SPP FOR
SHRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPAIL, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED.)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO, A) QUASH THE FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT (F.I.R) AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME
NO.99/2022 DATED 04.08.2022 REGISTERED AT ASHOK NAGAR
POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI, FOR OFFENCES WHICH ARE
MADE UNDER SECTIONS 109, 114, 120-B, 409, 420 READ WITH
SECTIONS 34, 36, 37 AND 149 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE,
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE Vth ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR
DIVISION) AND J.M.F.C. KALABURAGI.
IN CRL.P. NO.201153/2022
BETWEEN
RUDRAGOUDA PATIL @ R.D. PATIL,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
S/O. DEVENDRAPPA PATIL,
RESIDENT OF THE PREMISES,
BEARING NO.42, HIG -1,
EAST WING, HALE BIDDAPURA,
AIRPORT LAND,
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY,
GULBARGA - 585102
...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. ASHOK B.MULAGE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION,
GULBARGA,
REPRESENTED BY
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
7
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA - 585 107
2. SRI.SHIVAPRASAD NELLUR
DETECTIVE SUB-INSPECTOR,
C.C.D, C.I.D, BENGALURU
KARNATAKA - 500001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. KIRAN S.JAVALI, SR. COUNSEL - SPP FOR
SHRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPAIL, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED.)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO, A) QUASH THE FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT (F.I.R) AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME
NO.98/2022 DATED 04.08.2022 REGISTERED AT ASHOK NAGAR
POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI, FOR OFFENCES WHICH ARE
MADE UNDER SECTIONS 109, 114, 120-B, 409, 420 READ WITH
SECTIONS 34, 36, 37 AND 149 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE,
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE Vth ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR
DIVISION) AND J.M.F.C. KALABURAGI.
IN CRL.P.NO.201154/2022
BETWEEN
RUDRAGOUDA PATIL @ R.D.PATIL,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
S/O.DEVENDRAPPA PATIL,
RESIDENT OF THE PREMISES,
BEARING NO. 42, HIG-1,
EAST WING, HALE BIDDAPURA,
AIRPORT LAND,
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY,
GULBARGA 585 102
...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. ASHOK B.MULAGE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
UNIVERSITY POLICE STATION,
GULBARGA,
REPRESENTED BY
8
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA
2. SRI.SHIVAPRASAD NELLUR
DETECTIVE SUB-INSPECTOR,
C.C.D., C.I.D, BENGALURU
KARNATAKA
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. KIRAN S.JAVALI, SR.COUNSEL - SPP FOR
SHRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPAIL, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED.)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO, A) QUASH THE FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT (F.I.R) AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME
NO.182/2022 DATED 04.08.2022 REGISTERED AT UNIVERSITY
POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI, FOR OFFENCES WHICH ARE
MADE UNDER SECTIONS 109, 114, 120-B, 409, 420 READ WITH
SECTIONS 34, 36, 37 AND 149 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE,
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE III ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR
DIVISION) AND J.M.F.C. KALABURAGI.
IN CRL.P.NO.201155/2022
BETWEEN
RUDRAGOUDA PATIL @ R.D. PATIL,
AGED ABOUT 38 YEARS,
S/O. DEVENDRAPPA PATIL,
RESIDENT OF THE PREMISES
BEARING NO.42, HIG-1,
EAST WING, HALE BIDDAPURA,
AIRPORT LAND,
AKKAMAHADEVI COLONY,
GULBARGA - 585102
...PETITIONER
(BY SHRI. ASHOK B.MULAGE, ADVOCATE)
AND
1. STATE OF KARNATAKA,
BY THE STATION HOUSE OFFICER,
ASHOK NAGAR POLICE STATION,
GULBARGA,
REPRESENTED BY
9
STATE PUBLIC PROSECUTOR,
HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA
GULBARGA - 585107
2. SRI.SHIVAPRASAD NELLUR
DETECTIVE SUB-INSPECTOR,
C.C.D, C.I.D BENGALURU
KARNATAKA - 500001
...RESPONDENTS
(BY SHRI. KIRAN S.JAVALI, SR. COUNSEL - SPP FOR
SHRI. VEERANAGOUDA MALIPAIL, HCGP FOR R1
R2 SERVED.)
THIS CRL.P FILED U/S.482 OF CR.P.C. BY THE ADVOCATE
FOR THE PETITIONER PRAYING THAT THIS HONOURABLE
COURT MAY BE PLEASED TO, A) QUASH THE FIRST
INFORMATION REPORT (F.I.R) AND COMPLAINT IN CRIME
NO.97/2022 DATED 04.08.2022 REGISTERED AT ASHOK NAGAR
POLICE STATION, KALABURAGI, FOR OFFENCES WHICH ARE
MADE UNDER SECTIONS 109, 114, 120-B, 409, 420 READ WITH
SECTIONS 34, 36, 37 AND 149 OF THE INDIAN PENAL CODE,
PENDING ON THE FILE OF THE Vth ADDL. CIVIL JUDGE (JUNIOR
DIVISION) AND J.M.F.C. KALABURAGI.
THESE PETITIONS HAVING BEEN HEARD AND RESERVED
FOR ORDERS, COMING ON FOR PRONOUNCEMENT OF ORDER,
THIS DAY, THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
ORDER
Crl.P.No.200948/2022 is filed under Section 482 of Code of Criminal Procedure, 1908 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'Cr.P.C.') by the petitioner - Rudranagouda Patil who is arraigned as accused No.14 seeking to quash the FIR registered in Cr.No.48/2022 by Chowk Police station, for the offences under Sections, 120B, 109, 114, 119, 201, 202, 204, 212, 409, 411, 420, 465, 468, 471 10 r/w 34, 36, 37 and 149 of Indian Penal Code, 1860 (for short hereinafter referred to as 'IPC') pending on the file of 3rd Additional JMFC Court, Kalaburagi in C.C.No.14774/2022;
Crl.P.No.200700/2022 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner - Rudranagouda Patil who is arraigned as accused No.1 seeking to quash the FIR registered in Cr.No.57/2022 by Station Bazar police station, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 109, 201, 204, 409, 411, 420 r/w 34, 36 and 37 IPC, pending on the file of Principal Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC Court, Kalaburagi in C.C.No.15193/2022;
Crl.P.No.200701/2022 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner - Rudranagouda Patil who is arraigned as accused No.2 seeking to quash the FIR registered in Cr.No.79/2022 registered by Station Bazar police station, for the offences punishable under Sections 120B, 201, 204, 409, 420 r/w 34, 36 & 37 IPC, pending on the file of Principal JMFC Court, Kalaburagi in C.C.No.17174/2022;
11
Crl.P.No.201151/2022 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner - Rudranagouda Patil who is arraigned as accused No.4 seeking to quash the FIR registered in Cr.No.96/2022 registered by Ashok Nagar police station, Kalaburagi for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 114, 120B, 409, 420, r/w 34, 36, 37 & 149 IPC, pending on the file of III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Kalaburagi;
Crl.P.No.201152/2022 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner - Rudranagouda Patil who is arraigned as accused No.2 seeking to quash the FIR registered in Cr.No.99/2022 registered by Ashok Nagar police station, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 114, 120B, 409, 420, r/w 34, 36, 37 & 149 IPC, III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Kalaburagi;
Crl.P.No.201153/2022 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner - Rudranagouda Patil who is arraigned as accused No.2 seeking to quash the FIR registered in Cr.No.98/2022 registered by Ashok Nagar police station, for the offences punishable under Sections 12 109, 114, 120B, 409, 420, r/w 34, 36 & 37 149 IPC, III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Kalaburagi;
Crl.P.No.201154/2022 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner - Rudranagouda Patil who is arraigned as accused No.2 seeking to quash the FIR registered in Cr.No.182/2022 registered by University Colony police station, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 114, 120B, 409, 420, r/w 34, 36, 37 & 149 IPC, III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Kalaburagi;
and Crl.P.No.201155/2022 is filed under Section 482 of Cr.P.C. by the petitioner - Rudranagouda Patil who is arraigned as accused No.2 seeking to quash the FIR registered in Cr.No.97/2022 registered by Ashok Nagar police station, for the offences punishable under Sections 109, 114, 120B, 409, 420, r/w 34, 36, 37 & 149 IPC III Additional Civil Judge (Jr.Dn.) and JMFC, Kalaburagi;
2. It is contended that the petitioner is a business man and he is a Civil Contractor and he was also into politics. He was elected as a Grama Panchayat Member 13 from Gour Village Panchayat, Gulbuarga and he has earned a good respect and received accolades at the hands of several individuals and organization across the length and breadth of this Country.
3. It is further contended that on 24.04.2022, the petitioner/Rudragouda Patil came to be arrested in respect of FIRs registered in different crime numbers in different police station and shown as accused No.14 in Cr.No.48/2022 and in other FIRs he is arraigned as accused No.1, 2 and 4 respectively in each cases, in connection with a scam surfaced in the examinations conducted for selection of Police Sub-Inspectors conducted on 21.01.2021 as per Gazette Notification No.98-2-2020- 21 of the Karnataka Police Department. It is alleged that at the time of examination and evaluation, some of the candidates have manipulated their OMR sheets and have committed fraud by forging certain documents. Therefore, injustice has been caused to the meritorious candidates who had applied and written their examination for selection of Police Sub-Inspectors. Therefore, the Government of Karnataka, ordered for investigation into the allegations. 14 Accordingly, the investigation was handed over to the Crime Investigation Department (for short hereinafter referred to as 'CID') for investigation. The said case is popularly known as 'PSI selection Scam'.
4. During the investigation of the case, several accused persons and the candidates who have secured ranks in the said Police Sub-Inspectors (PSI) examination, were arrested by Sub-Inspector. On the basis of their voluntary statement, the petitioner came to be arrested and he is arraigned as accused No.14 in Cr.No.48/2022 and remanded to judicial custody. Now the investigation is completed in Cr.No.48/2022 and charge sheet is filed. It is alleged that the petitioner has collected huge money and assisted the candidates who have appeared for the said PSI examination by using a Bluetooth device and helped them to answer the questions illegally and assisted them to get themselves selected for the post of Police Sub- Inspectors. Being aggrieved by the registration of Cr.No.48/2022 and multiple cases in several crime numbers, in relation to the very same offences, the petitioner has preferred these petitions. 15
5. Heard the learned Senior Counsel Sri. Ravi.B. Naik for Sri. Sanjay Kulkarni, Sri.Ashok B.Mulage, learned counsel for petitioner in Crl.P.No.200948/2022 and in connected cases and Sri. Kiran S.Javali, Senior Counsel/ State Public Prosecutor respondent No.1/State in all the cases.
6. Though the learned senior counsel for the petitioner/accused No.14 in Crl.P.No.200948/2022 on the earlier date of hearing argued for quashing proceedings, but the learned senior counsel submitted that the petitioner has given up the prayer to seek quashing of cases at this stage. The learned counsel argued that in all these cases, some of the complainants have filed cases at Bengaluru and some cases are filed at Kalaburagi. Therefore, it will cause hardship to the petitioner to attend different Courts on different dates. The entire allegations made against this petitioner in all the cases is same, may be offences are different in some cases and the accused are different and complainant are different. The learned Senior counsel argued that in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of ABHISHEK SINGH 16 CHAUHAN VS. UNION OF INDIA reported in 2022 LiveLaw (SC) 608 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court directed clubbing of all the FIRs which can proceed together for one trial as far as possible to avoid multiplicity of the proceedings and it will be in the larger public interest. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has also observed that where directions for clubbing of FIRs is being passed, subsequently registered FIRs shall be treated as statements under Section 161 of Cr.P.C and the investigating officer in criminal case arising from the first FIR in the concerned State, as referred above, will be free to file supplementary charge sheet after collation of all the records concerning other FIRs in the respective States, which are clubbed. The Hon'ble supreme Court has further held that needless to observe that the other offences not part of the special enactments can also be tried by the special Court under the concerned State legislation. Learned Senior Counsel also relied on the decision of Allahabad High Court in the case of Shamshad Ahmad Vs. State of U.P. Through Principal Secretary decided on 17.12.2021 wherein the Allahabad High Court has 17 considered the matter and issued directions for clubbing of all the three charge sheets together inasmuch as, the occurrence indicated in the second and third FIR is prima- facie appearing as a fall out of the first occurrence indicated in the first FIR and referred to the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of C.Muniappan Vs. State of Tamil Nadu reported in (2010) 9 SCC 567 and directions were issued to club the matters and observed that Section 220 Cr.P.C itself authorizes that in a similar situation the accused person should be tried in one trial. Hence, learned Senior counsel prayed to club all the FIRs together and tried by one Court as the petitioner in all these petitions is same and also offence is same.
7. Against this, learned State Public Prosecutor argued that this Court could not order to club all the FIRs'. Because apart from petitioner, other persons are also arraigned as accused and place of occurrence of incident are different. The Courts which have taken cognizance are different. The investigation is still going on. In some of the cases the offence under the provisions of Prevention of Corruption Act may be invoked, if such being the case, 18 then the said cases will have to be tried by a Special Court. Prevention of Money Laundering Act, may be invoked, looking into the magnitude of the offence under different enactment, the charge sheet may be filed against number of persons including this petitioner. In such a cases jurisdiction of Special Court is different. Some of the cases are triable by Magistrate Court, some may be by District and Sessions Court and some are by Special Court constituted under the Special Enactment. Therefore, prayer for clubbing of FIRs' is not tenable, as the jurisdiction of the courts differs as per the nature of the offences which are yet to be invoked as the investigation is still under progress. Further the learned State Public Prosecutor argued that in the case of Abhishek Singh Chauhan referred by petitioner counsel, the Hon'ble Supreme Court by exercising the power under Article 32 and extraordinary power under Article 142 of the Constitution of India has ordered for clubbing of the FIRs' and such power is vested only with the Hon'ble Supreme Court, but this Court cannot exercise power under Articles 32 and 142 of the Constitution of India, since the matters are pending in 19 different stages and for different offences, against different accused. In the case of Abhishek Singh Chauhan referred supra the Hon'ble Supreme Court has ordered for clubbing of FIRs only in respect of general offences, i.e., the offences under the IPC and the offences under the special legislations; and not offences concerning the prevention of Money Laundering Act and prevention of Corruption Act as the said offences have to be proceed under a separate legislation and of which the investigation is done by a separate investigating agency and further ordered for clubbing of cases and also direction was given to conduct the trial by Special Court. Therefore, learned counsel argued that the said decision will not help the petitioner in anyway. Still some of the cases are pending for investigation. It is alleged that the petitioner - Rudragouda Patil in all these cases is the kingpin of 'PSI scam' and investigation is yet to be completed in some of the cases and charge sheet may be filed invoking the offences under Organised Crime, Prevention of Corruption Act and Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA), 2002. Therefore order for clubbing of all such cases with different 20 Special Enactment offences may not be feasible in view of trial of such case by designated courts. In support of his contention, the learned State Public Prosecutor relied on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Anil Singh Alias Anil Kumar Singh and others reported in 2021 SCC Online SC 1294 wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court has observed that as multiple FIRs were registered which pertains to same incident and after completion of investigation, police reports were also filed in some cases, in the light of the subsequent developments, the Hon'ble Supreme Court gave liberty to the accused therein to apply/argue for discharge before the concerned Court, if so advised and directed the concerned Court to decide the each case on its own merits in accordance with law without being influenced by any observation made by the High Court and in addition to that liberty was also given to apply to the concerned Court for clubbing of trial of all the cases to be tried together, and such application also may be considered by the concerned Court on its own merit. Therefore, learned State Public Prosecutor argued that in the light of the above decisions, 21 the prayer for clubbing of all cases, FIRs' is not tenable and prayed to dismiss the petitions.
8. I have perused the charge sheet filed in Cr.No.48/2022 and considered the arguments addressed by the learned counsel for both the parties. It is evident that as per the records produced by the learned State Public Prosecutor, the charge sheet is filed only in three cases, but there are number of FIRs' registered and investigation has to be completed and charge sheet is to be filed in several cases. It is also stated that even the cases are registered in different parts of the State and the investigations are going on. In order to appreciate the same, it is necessary to refer to the chart furnished by the State Public Prosecutor showing the crime numbers, complainant, offences, place of offence and other particulars and the same reads as under:
Sl. Crime Date of Accused Police Offences Complainan Place of Crime C.C.No. No . No. filing the station t complaint
1. 96/2022 4/08/2022 Rudranagouda Ashoknagar 109, 114, Sri.Shiva Sri -
Patil/Accused Kalaburagi 120-B, 409, Prasad Sharanabasav No.4 420, r/w 34, Nellur eshwar 36, 37 149 of (CCD, CID- College of IPC, 1860 Detective Arts, Sub- Vidyanagar, Inspector Kalaburagi
2. 97/2022 4/08/2022 Rudranagouda Ashoknagar 109, 114, Sri.Shivapr Sri -
Patil/Accused Kalaburagi 120-B, 409, asad Nellur Sharanabasav
No.2 420, r/w 34, (CCD, CID) eshwar
36, 37 149 of College of
IPC, 1860 Commerce,
22
Vidyanagar,
Kalaburagi
3. 98/2022 4/08/2022 Rudranagouda Ashoknagar 109, 114, Sri.Shivapr Sri -
Patil/Accused Kalaburagi 120-B, 409, asad Nellur Sharanabasav
No.2 420, r/w 34, (CCD, CID) eshwar
36, 37, 149 of College of
IPC, 1860 Science,
Vidyanagar,
Kalaburagi
4. 99/2022 4/08/2022 Rudranagouda Ashoknagar 109, 114, Sri.Shivapr Godutayi -
Patil/Accused Kalaburagi 120-B, 409, asad Nellur college for
No.2 420, r/w 34, (CCD, CID) women,
36, 37 149 of (DSI) Vidyanagar,
IPC, 1860 Kalaburagi.
5. 182/2022 04/08/2022 Rudranagouda University 109, 114, Sri.Shivapr Govt. Degree
Patil/Accused Colony, 120-B, 409, asad Nellur college
No.3 Kalaburagi 420, r/w 34, (CCD, CID) (Autonomus),
36, 37 149 of (DSI) Sedam Road,
IPC, 1860 Kalaburagi
6. 48/2022 09/04/2022 Rudranagouda Chowk 109, 120-B, Sri. Jnanajyothi C.C.No.
Patil/Accused Police 114, 119, K.H.Dileep English 14774/2022
No.14 Station 202, 204, Kumar Medium
Kalaburagi 212, 409, (Inspector School,
411, 420, FIU, CID) Gokulnagar,
465, 468, 471 Kalaburagi
r/w 34, 36, 37
of IPC, 1860
7. 57/2022 02/05/2022 Rudranagouda Station 109, 120-B, Prakash M.S.Irani C.C.No.
Patil/Accused Bazar, 201, 204, Rathod, College, Near 15193/2022
No.1 Kalaburagi 409, 411, 420 Dysp Chandrashekh
r/w 34, 36 ar Patil
and 37 of IPC, Stadium,
1860 Kalaburagi.
8. 79/2022 08/06/2022 Rudranagouda Station 120B, 201, Prakash Nobel Girls C.C.No.
Patil/Accused Bazar, 204, 409, 420 Rathod, High School, 17174/2022
No.2 Kalaburagi r/w 34, 36 Dysp Vasanth
and 37 of IPC, Nagar,
1860 Kalaburagi
9. It is evident from the said chart that the complainants in all the cases are not the same. Even all the accused are not same except this petitioner who is alleged as kingpin of the PSI scam and who is the master mind behind the alleged offence. The offence are not same. Place of offence is different and only in three cases, the charge sheets are filed. It is alleged that the petitioner in all these petitions has committed the alleged offence by providing blue-tooth device to the candidates by taking the 23 money, who have appeared for the PSI examinations and with the help of blue-tooth device, some of the candidates have written the exam in different exam centers illegally. Ofcourse, the matters require investigation in several cases and still investigation is going on. As stated by learned State Public Prosecutor, that in view of the nature of the offences, the amount involved, the magnitude of the cases involved and as public servants are involved, there may be chances that investigation officer after investigation may file charge sheet invoking the offences under Prevention of Corruption Act, Prevention of Money Laundering Act and also under Organised Crime Act and other different offences may be invoked. Therefore, the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Abishek Singh Chauhan referred supra will not help the petitioner at this stage.
10. On the other hand, the decision in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Anil Singh Alias Anil Kumar Kingh and others referred supra is squarely applicable to this case and it is for the petitioner to apply to the concerned Court seeking clubbing of the trial of the cases which are to 24 be tried together and if any such applications are filed by the petitioner, the concerned Court shall decide the matter on merits. It is also open for the accused/petitioner to requests the District/Sessions Court for allotting the charge sheet to one Court to proceed in accordance with law. In the light of decision of State of Bihar Vs. Anil Singh Alias Anil Kumar Kingh and others, referred supra, it is also possible that the accused may argue or apply for discharge before the concerned Court, if he so desire. The Hon'ble Supreme Court at paragraph Nos.6, 7 and 8 of the said decision held as under:
"6. In light of this development, it may not be appropriate to examine the correctness of the view taken by the High Court in the present appeal. Instead, we would give liberty to the respondents/accused to apply/argue for discharge before the concerned Court, it so advised. All contentions available in respect of that relief will have to be considered by the concerned Court on its own merits in accordance with law without being influenced by any observation made by the High Court in the impugned judgment, which we hereby set aside in terms of this order.25
7. Needless to observe that in the application for discharge, it will be open to the respondents/accused to urge the grounds taken by them before the High Court and referred to in the impugned judgment which, as aforesaid, will have to be considered on its own merits and in accordance with law uninfluenced by the observations made in the impugned judgment.
8. In addition, it will be open to the respondents/accused to apply to the concerned courts for clubbing trial of all the cases to be tried together, which application also may be considered by the concerned Court on its own merits and in accordance with law. Alternatively, it may be open to the respondents/accused, including to the prosecution to make a request to the Sessions Judge for allotting the charge sheets to one Court, to be proceeded in accordance with law."
11. In the decision of Shamsahd Ahamad referred supra, relied on by petitioner's counsel, the Allahabad High Court observed that the accused were 26 protesters who were opposing implementation of CAA and NRC and in the FIR's, the sections of IPC are almost same except one or two charges and the complainants are Police Officers/Officials and therefore, 'Test of Sameness' which says that where there is proximity of time, or place or unity of purposes and design or continuity of action in respect of series of acts, the safe inference may be drawn that they form part of the same transactions, therefore, ordered for clubbing of three FIRs' and the Allahabad High Court at paragraph Nos. 33, 34, 35, 36 & 37 held as under:
"33. Therefore, 'Test of Sameness' which says that where there is proximity of time, or place or unity of purposes and design or continuity of action in respect of series of acts, the safe inference may be drawn that they form part of the same transactions, therefore, the aforesaid test appears to have been applied in the present case.
34. In view of the above, I find it appropriate that the direction may be issued for clubbing all the three Charge-sheets together inasmuch as the occurrence indicated in the second and third FIR is 27 prima-facie appearing as a fall out of the first occurrence indicated in the first FIR.
Therefore, I am an agreement with the dictum of Hon'ble Apex Court in re:C.Muniappan (supra) to the effect that merely because three separate FIRs have been filed do not mean that they could not be clubbed together and one charge-sheet could not be filed.
35. In the present case, Investigating Officer should have clubbed all the FIRs and should have filed one charge-sheet. Such act of clubbing would have been in conformity with the Circular No.DG-21/2016 dated 26.04.2016, which has been issued by the Director General of Police, Uttar Pradesh in consonance with the direction of Hon'ble Apex Court issued in re: T.T. Anthony (supra).
36. So far as the manner in which the learned Magistrate has taken cognizance in all the three impugned charge-sheets is concerned, I must observe that while taking cognizance it appears that he has not applied his judicious mind and has not appreciated and perused the material available on record, particularly, not 28 examined the complicity and involvement of the present petitioner who has been implicated in the present case invoking Section 120-B I.P.C. Even if the Magistrate has appreciated and perused the material available on record while taking cognizance of the FIR dated 05.08.2020, at least while taking cognizance of second and third charge-sheet, the Magistrate must have asked the Investigating Agency as to why after carrying out separate investigation in all the three, more or less similar, incidents, three separate charge-sheets have been filed therein. The Magistrate must have asked as to why all the three charge-sheets have not been clubbed together for the purposes of trial. The learned Magistrate must have seen that what prejudice would be caused to the prosecution if the single charge-sheet is filed clubbing all the charge-
sheets together inasmuch as Section 220 Cr.P.C. itself authorizes that in a similar situation the accused person should be tried in one trial. Therefore, the guidelines of Hon'ble Apex Court in re:Fakhruddin Ahmad (supra) must have been followed by the learned Magistrate while taking cognizance of the charge-sheet.
29
37. Therefore, without interfering with the impugned charge-sheets, I hereby quash the cognizance order dated 26.08.2020 whereby the cognizance has been taken of the Charge-sheet No.33-A of 2020 dated 25.04.2020 and the cognizance order dated 26.11.2020 whereby the cognizance has been taken of the Charge-sheet No.99-A of 2020 dated 25.04.2020."
12. This decision will not come to the aid of the petitioner. In this case, investigation is still going on, Courts jurisdiction may also differ and charge sheet may also be filed invoking Prevention of Corruption Act and Prevention of Money Laundering Act and other special enactment as submitted by State Public Prosecutor and those offences have to be triable by Special Court designated or District and Sessions Court and Magistrate Court, by taking into consideration the nature of the offences and jurisdiction.
13. Therefore, in view of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Bihar Vs. Anil Singh Alias Anil Kumar Singh and others reported in 30 2021 SCC Online SC 1294 referred supra, these petitions are liable to be dismissed, as the prayer for clubbing is at the premature stage. After filing of final report or charge sheet for different offence, the petitioner may approach or request the concerned Court for his discharge or may seek for clubbing of cases.
14. Therefore, as the petitioner in all the cases has given up the request of quashing of the FIRs and the charge sheets filed against him. Therefore, taking into consideration the facts and circumstances of the case, the petitions are liable to be dismissed as the same does not survive for consideration.
15. Hence, I pass the following:
ORDER The Criminal Petition Nos.200948/2022, 200700/2022, 200701/2022, 201151/2022, 201152/2022, 201153/2022, 201154/2022 and 201155/2022 are hereby by dismissed.31
2. However, it is open to the petitioner/accused to approach the concerned District Court or trial Court and apply for clubbing of trial of the cases which are to be tried together by one Court, after the charge sheets are filed in other cases. It is open to the petitioner to file application seeking for his discharge, if he is so advised. The concerned Court shall consider such application or request on its own merits and in accordance with law without being influenced by the observations made by this Court.
3. All other contentions are kept open.
Sd/-
JUDGE HJ