Item no. 39
C.R.R. No.2118 of 2018
In Re: An application under Section 401 read with Section 482 of
the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973.
In the matter of:-
Prabir Mukherjee ors.
Mr. Abdur Rakib,
Mr. Jisan Ahamed
…for the petitioners
Mr. Binoy Kumar Panda,
Mr. Subham Kanti Bhakat
…for the State
The affidavit-of-service filed in Court be kept on record.
This is an application under Section 401 read with Section 482
of the Code of Criminal Procedure seeking an order of
amalgamation of the proceedings registered in connection with
Khardah Police Station Case No.117 of 2018 dated 09.02.2018
under Sections 420/Section34 of the Indian Penal Code, corresponding to
G.R. Case No.759 of 2018 with the proceedings arising out of
Khardah Police Station Case No.768 of 2017 dated 18th October,
2017 under Section 406 of the Indian Penal Code corresponding to
G.R. Case No.6951 of 2017, both pending before the court of
Learned Additional Chief Judicial Magistrate, 24 Parganas (North).
It is submitted by the learned advocate for the petitioners that
de-facto complainant/opposite party no.2 filed F.I.R. under Section
154 of the Cr.P.C. on 18th Day of October, 2017 at Khardah Police
Station alleging commission of the offence under Section 406 I.P.C.
and which was registered as Khardah Police Station Case No.768
of 2017 dated 18th October, 2017 under Section 406 I.P.C. and
over the selfsame incident the selfsame de-facto complainant also
filed an application under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. dated 1st
November, 2017 seeking police investigation alleging commission
of offence under Sections 420/Section34 I.P.C., which on being ordered by
the Learned Magistrate, police registered Khardah Police Station
Case No.117 of 2018 dated 9.2.2018 under Sections 420/Section34 of the
Indian Penal Code.
It is further submitted by the learned advocate for the
petitioners that the allegation made out in both the cases are same
lodged by the selfsame de-facto complainant against the selfsame
accused persons, wherein the de-facto complainant sought to
recover Rs.2,47,000/- from the petitioners/accused persons
alleging same to have been cheated.
Learned advocate for the petitioners further submits that over
the selfsame incident against the selfsame parties, registration of
the case twice is not permissible and as such an order may be
necessary to otherwise secure the ends of justice, requiring
intervention of this Court in the given set of facts.
Learned advocate representing the State submits that since
police had no sufficient information about the previous registration
of the case over the selfsame incident, the investigating officer was
duty bound to register the case under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. after
being ordered by the Learned Magistrate under Section 156(3)
The only point to be considered is whether the prayer for
clubbing together of both the cases is permissible in the given set
of facts or not.
Admittedly, de-facto complainant lent money to
petitioners/accused persons in the interest of pursuing higher
education of the son of the petitioner no.1. Some of the money
given as loan has been paid back, but the most of the money could
not be given back to de-facto complainant causing him to suffer
extreme prejudice and in connection therewith he proceeded to file
first case under Section 154 Cr.P.C. before the Khardah Police
Station which was registered on 18th October, 2017 under Section
Since no favourable position as per desire of the de-facto
complainant could be reached, a separate case under Section
156(3) Cr.P.C. was again filed by the de-facto complainant praying
for recovery of Rs. 2,47,000/- which he alleges to have been
cheated by the petitioners.
The facts and circumstances and the averments contained in
both the cases are same leaving no ambiguity therein, and it is
basically for recovery of the money alleging the same to have been
cheated. The second case under Section 156(3) Cr.P.C. over the
selfsame incident was filed on 1st November, 2017, which was
registered by Khardah Police Station on 9th February, 2018. The
investigating officer of Khardah Police Station Case No.117 of 2018
dated 9.2.2018 ought to have brought to the notice of the Learned
Magistrate about the previous registration of the case by the
selfsame de-facto complainant over the selfsame incident, but this
is not the position in the instant case. However, there is a
provision under Section 210 Cr.P.C. to take care of clubbing
together of both the cases instituted one of police report and
otherwise than of police report. But there is no such conspicuous
provision to take care of instant situation. However, the principle
underlying Section 210 Cr.P.C. may be borrowed in the given set of
facts, in order to secure the ends of justice. The plenary
jurisdiction given under Section 482 Cr.P.C. can be made
applicable when the tests mentioned in the section itself is
justified. Since selfsame contention is involved in both the police
cases registered at selfsame Police Station, at the instance of
selfsame complaint reference of which is mentioned hereinabove,
the Court is of the view that it is extremely necessary to pass order
directing both the police cases being No.768 of 2017 and 117 of
2018, both of Khardah Police Station Case be investigated
clubbing both the cases together in accordance with the provisions
of the law.
The revisional application thus succeeds being with merits.
With this observation/direction, this revisional application
stands disposed of.
Urgent certified photostat copy of this order, if applied for, be
given to the parties as expeditiously as possible on compliance of
all necessary formalities.
(Subhasis Dasgupta, J.)